3> 

.1 


^^^^UIBRARY^/: 


■^/MdAINIIJV\v 


-s^lLIBRARY/?/^ 


^(>Aavayii-i>:^' 


'c/Aavayiiix> 


\\^[UNIVER%         vj^lOSANCElfX; 


\^my\^^     ^^mmy\^       -^mi^m^ 


'^Aa3AINa3WN 


^.OFCALIFO% 


^^OfCALIFO;?.]^ 


-<  ii=' 


^^<?Ayv{iaii-i^ 


^MEUNIVER5"//, 


vvlOSANCElfj. 


^^AHVHaiH^'^  <rii]0NVS01^ 


'^Aa3AINi13W> 


'id 


XWEUNIVERS/A 


.V^OSANCElfj-^ 

i 


%a3AiNa]WV^ 


^vM-llBRARYQ^       ^^^l•LIBRARY(9^ 


^(!/0JIlV3JO>'        '^<!/0JI]V3JO' 


,^WEUNIVER5'/A 


"^J^il^DNVSOl^^ 


.V^OSANCElfj> 


%a]AiNa3WV 


^^OFCAIIFO%        ^^^OFCAIIFOfiH 


^^lllBRARYQr         ^^^ILIBRARYO^ 


%jnV3J0'^       %OJI1VJJO^ 


\\^EUNIVER^//, 


vvlOSANGElfj. 


'^>rii33NVS01^' 


so 


^OFCAUFO/?^ 


'^Ayvyaiv^^^ 


^OFCAIIFO/?^ 


^\\^EUNIVER% 


vj^lOSANCElfj: 

o 


<Fil]0NVS01^''         %a3AINa]V^ 


<^ 


j\WEUNIVER5'/^ 


o 


.*. 


^WE•UNIVER5/^ 


>^lOSANCElfj> 
o 


%a3AINn3WV 


v^lOSANCElfj> 


^IIIBRARY(9/; 


^lliBRARYQ. 


^«5/OJIlV3JO^ 
^,OF•CA[IF0/?^ 


^.OFCAIIFO/?^ 


^ 


yorinvDJov 


'■^/^aJAINn^HV 


s^UIBRARYQ/: 


•'UAnnmvi'^'' 


'^<yojnv3JO>' 


> 

-< 

%il3AINn-3UV^ 


^OFCALIFO/?^;. 


"^^Ayvyaiiii^ 


^^\\E•UNIVERV4 


>;lOSANCElfj> 


'^Aa3AiNn]WV^ 


y<j 


o 


^vWSANCELfj^ 


3>        =2 


%a3AINn-3WV^ 


^^IIIBRARY^/^        -^^^IIIBRARYQ^ 


^WE- 


'Cf 


o 


^VlOSANGELfj^ 


'^/^iJBAlNOlWV^ 


^^;OFCA[1FO%        ^^OFCAilFO% 


^WE 


.N^ 


aV^IIIBRARYQt 


\\\EUNIVER5'//, 


^lOSANCElfj> 


'^(^OJIIVDJO^  ^rii^ONVSOl^"^        ■^AaiAINOJWV^  ^ 


^OFCALIFO/?^  ^^WE•UNIVER5"/^ 


v>:lOSANCElfj> 


"^^AwyaiH^^ 


<rii]0Nvsoi^ 


> 

so 


i 


^, 


o 


^VlOSANCElfX^ 


"^/sa^AiNd^wv 


.>clOSANCElfj> 


-^ILIBRARYO^         ^llIBRARY^/r 


;^.QFCAIIFO%.        ^OFCAilFO/?^ 


aWEUNF 


^\^E• 


/^ 


.  kh^n  //- 


/    -'  7 


A  LITEEAEY 
HISTOEY  OF  EAELY  CHEISTIANITY. 


A  LITEKARY  HISTORY 


OP 


EAELY    CHRISTIANITY 

INCLUDING  THE 

FATHERS  AND  THE  CHIEF  HERETICAL   WRITERS 
OF  THE  ANTE-NICENE  PERIOD. 

fox  tbe  Xllse  of  Students  anb  General  IReabets* 


BY 

CHAELES  THOMAS  CRUTTWELL,  M.A. 

RECTOR  OP  KIBWORTH,  LEICESTER,  AND  RURAL  DEAN ;  FORMERLY  FELLOW  OF  MERTON 

COLLEGE,   OXFORD. 

AUTHOR  OF  "A  HISTORY  OF  ROMAN  LITERATURE,"  ETC. 


5n  ZvQO  tDolumes. 

VOL.  I. 

NEW   YORK: 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S    SONS, 

743  &  745  BROADWAY. 

1893. 


Cdst 


V, 


TO  THE  MOST  REVEREND 

EDWARD. 

LORD    ARCHBISHOP    OF    CANTERBURY. 

VISITOR    OF    MERTON    COLLEGE, 

WHOSE    PROFOUND    LEARNING    IS    NOWHERE    MORE    AT    HOME. 

THAN    AMONG 

Ube  Undent  ^fatbers, 

THIS 

HISTORY  OF  THE  LITERATURE  OF  THE  EARLY  CHURCH 

IS    BY    HIS    PERMISSION 

RESPECTFULLY  DEDICATED. 


208378 


PREFACE. 

I 

The  encouraging  reception  given  to  my  "  History  of  Eoman 
Literature,"  published  in  1877,  suggested  the  extension  of 
the  same  plan  to  the  more  complicated  field  of  the  Literature 
of  the  early  Church. 

So  far  as  I  am  aware,  there  is  no  English  work  which 
exactly  covers  the  same  ground  ;  and  I  hope  that  the  present 
volume  may  be  found  to  supply  a  real  want,  both  for  students 
of  theology  and  for  general  readers  who  desire  to  see  for 
themselves  what  the  first  exjoonents  of  Christian  doctrine 
after  the  Apostles  believed  and  taught. 

Upwards  of  seven  years  have  been  spent  in  collecting  the 
materials  for  this  work.  The  original  authorities  have  in  all 
cases  been  carefully  studied,  and,  in  addition,  information 
has  been  gathered  from  such  of  the  best  known  and  most 
recent  Church  histories,  dictionaries,  and  monographs  as 
were  within  my  reach.  Where  more  than  the  general  out- 
lines of  the  thought  have  been  borrowed,  I  have  sought  in 
every  instance  to  acknowledge  my  indebtedness. 

The  pui-pose  I  have  had  in  view  is  mainly  literary — that  is, 
I  have  endeavoured  to  point  out  the  leading  intellectual  con- 
ceptions which  animate  the  various  writers,  to  indicate  the 
degree  of  success  attained  by  each,  and  to  estimate  the 
permanent  value  of  each  one's  contribution  to  the  growing 
edifice  of  human  thought  and  knowledge. 

The  student  will  find  included  in  the  list  of  Christian 
writers,  besides  the  Churcli  Fathers,  a  considerable  number 


viii  PREFACE. 

of  heretical  teachers  whose  works  have  perished,  but  whose 
ideas  are  more  or  less  correctly  preserved  in  the  controver- 
sial treatises  of  their  opponents.  Though  rightly  repudiated 
as  heretical,  these  speculations  entered  so  closely  into  the 
Church's  daily  life,  and  both  by  attraction  and  repulsion 
influenced  so  strongly  the  statements  of  Catholic  doctrine, 
that  it  was  felt  impossible  to  pass  them  by  with  a  mere 
cursory  notice.  It  is  hoped  that  the  analysis  of  them,  remote 
and  fantastic  as  they  seem  to  us,  will  not  prove  wearisome  to 
the  reader. 

The  Ante-Mcene  period  is,  on  the  whole,  more  varied  in 
character  than  that  which  immediately  follows  it.  The  two 
main  streams  of  Christian  thought,  represented  respectivel}- 
by  the  Greek  and  Latin  Churches,  have  already  begun  to 
diverge  from  their  common  watershed.  In  Origen  and  Ter- 
tullian  they  have  hewn  out  valleys  which  he  who  climbs  the 
intervening  heights  can  still  simultaneously  survey,  but  they 
have  not  yet  become  two  rivers  watering  different  regions,  as 
is  the  case  when  we  come  to  compare,  let  us  say,  Athanasius 
with  Augustine. 

At  the  present  day,  the  most  fruitful  Christian  thought  is 
moving  on  the  lines  of  the  Greek  Fathers.  The  controversies 
which  have  attended  the  publication  of  Licx  Muncli  have 
suggested  to  men's  minds  the  inadequacy  of  the  Augustinian 
theology  to  satisfy  the  desire  for  spiritual  enlightenment. 
A  deeper,  wider,  more  truly  human  theology  is  required.  In 
the  pages  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  of  Origen,  and  especially 
of  Athanasius,  such  a  theology  is  already  provided.  The 
Incarnation,  as  the  self-revealing  of  Divine  wisdom  and  love 
in  terms  of  a  nature  fitted  by  its  kinship  to  the  Deity  to  be 
the  vehicle  of  such  revelation — this  is  the  central  truth  of 
Christianity  as  apprehended  by  the  great  thinkers  of  Alex- 
andria.    Christ  the  Redeemer  of  all  humanity. — hr.manity 


PREFACE.  ix 

recalled  to  its  true  self  in  and  by  Christ, — the  will  once  more 
set  free  by  the  living  power  of  an  indwelling  Spirit,  Who 
opens  out  infinite  possibilities  of  development  by  revealing  to 
man  the  true  law  of  his  being — such  are  some  of  the  inspir- 
ing thoughts  of  Greek  theology,  which  respond  to  our  purest 
aspirations,  and  reconsecrate  man's  intellect  to  the  service 
of  God. 

An  able  writer  ^  has  taken  exception  to  the  clothing  of  the 
Church's  doctrine  in  the  forms  of  Greek  metaphysics.  But 
we  may  fairly  ask :  In  what  other  form  could  it  have  been 
clothed?  The  intuitions  of  Revelation,  to  be  presented  to 
the  universal  consciousness,  must  needs  be  recast  in  the  form 
of  thought  which  nearest  approaches  universality.  And  the 
world  has  yet  to  devise  an  instrument  better  fitted  to  achieve 
this  lofty  task  than  the  language  of  Greek  philosophy, 
fashioned  to  the  processes  of  exact  thought  by  the  continuous 
labour  of  the  highest  minds  for  nine  centuries,  and,  for 
Christians  at  least,  stamped  with  the  inspired  approval  of 
the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved.  The  answer  to  Dr.  Hatch's 
objection  can  hardly  be  better  expressed  than  in  the  words 
of  an  American  writer :  ^  "  The  influence  of  Hellenic  specula- 
tion in  determining  the  true  nature  of  the  Person  of  Christ 
is  not  a  thing  smuggled  surreptitiously  into  the  domain  of 
Christian  thought — an  alien  element,  to  be  carefully  elimi- 
nated, if  we  would  understand  the  original  revelation  in  its 
simplicity  and  purity.  It  enters  into  the  Divine  process  of 
preparation  for  the  Advent  of  Christ  as  a  constituent  factor ; 
it  is  essential  to  a  right  interpretation  of  the  Christian  Idea 
in  its  widest  and  highest  a^^plication." 

The  interpretation  of  revelation  is  a  process  continuous 
with  revelation  itself.     It  is  vain  to  wish  for  the  establish- 

^  The  late  Dr.  Hatch,  in  his  Hihhcrt  Lectures. 

^  Professor  Allen,  in  his  Continuity  of  Chr-istlan  Thought. 


X  PREFACE. 

ment  in  theology  of  the  simple,  instinctive  religious  language 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  This  language  always  will 
be,  as  it  always  has  been,  the  spontaneous  expression  of 
devout  souls  as  they  address  their  prayers  or  praises  to  the 
All-Merciful  Father.  But  until  the  modern  world  can  achieve, 
as  perhaps  it  may,  on  the  basis  of  inductive  science,  a  meta- 
physical terminology  superior  to  that  of  ancient  Greece,  we 
may  well  be  content  to  acce^^t  the  historic  definitions  of 
the  Church,  only  removing  what  can  be  proved  to  be  adven- 
titious or  unwarranted  by  the  sense  of  Scripture.  This  was 
indeed  the  professed  object  of  the  leaders  of  the  Keformation, 
but  they  were  not  able  sufficiently  to  disengage  themselves 
from  their  environment  to  perceive  that  the  views  they 
received  as  primitive  were  in  truth  largely  coloured  by  an 
Augustinian  medium,  which  refracted  and  often  obscured 
the  light. 

The  process  which  they  inaugurated  was  in  its  very  nature 
incomplete,  and  it  would  neither  be  possible  nor  desirable  to 
arrest  its  course.  In  taking  her  stand  upon  Holy  Scripture 
as  distinct  from  any  special  reading  of  its  sense,  the  Anglican 
Church  admits  the  possibility  of  a  progressive  interpretation 
corresponding  to  the  infinite  fecundity  of  Scripture  itself. 
And  the  true  successors  of  the  great  di\T.nes  of  the  sixteenth 
and  seventeenth  centuries  are  surely  those  who  are  turning 
upon  Holy  Scripture  the  entire  light  of  the  purified  human 
intelligence,  and  trying  to  make  it  speak  for  itself  in  those 
clear  tones  to  which,  once  heard,  the  mind  of  man  cannot 
but  respond. 

No  reverent  soul  will  presume  to  limit  the  meaning  of 
Scripture  to  that  primary  sense  historically  present  to  the 
mind  of  the  writer,  which  it  is  the  mission  of  our  present 
Biblical  criticism  incontrovertibly  to  establish  and  uniquely 
to  emphasise.    If  it  could  be  so  limited,  Scripture  would  cease 


PREFACE.  xi 

to  be  for  us  what  it  undoubtedly  is,  the  Word  of  God.  But 
it  is  surely  a  fallacy  to  conclude  that  those  who  bid  us  study 
the  Bible  as  we  study  any  other  book,  mean  also  to  assert 
that  the  Bible  is  nothing  more  than  any  other  book.  They 
are  really  reverting  under  changed  conditions  of  thought  to 
the  example  of  the  Greek  Fathers,  who  brought  to  the  study 
of  Scripture  those  canons  of  interpretation  which  the  highest 
science  of  their  day  applied  to  all  the  noblest  products  of  the 
human  mind,  to  Homer,  to  the  poetic  Cycle,  to  the  entire 
lore  of  the  antique  world.  No  doubt  their  method  was 
imperfect,  transitory,  destined  to  be  superseded ;  but  the 
principle  on  which  they  acted,  that  of  employing  the  highest 
available  culture  in  the  task  of  interpreting  Scripture,  was 
true  and  valid,  and  therefore  sure  to  reappear  when  the 
course  of  intellectual  development  made  its  reajopearance 
possible. 

The  methods  at  present  in  favour,  no  doubt,  appear  to 
those  engaged  in  applying  them  as  wholly  satisfying  and 
final.  And  the  language  used  by  many  Biblical  critics 
undoubtedly  justifies  a  cautious  attitude  with  regard  to  a 
subject  so  momentous  on  the  part  of  those  who  are  res23on- 
sible  for  the  custody  of  the  body  of  doctrine  handed  down 
to  them.  At  the  same  time,  since  it  is  by  reason  and  reason 
alone  that  the  words  of  Scripture  as  of  all  other  literature 
must  be  judged,  the  instructed  Christian  will  not  mistrust 
the  disciplined  use  of  that  divine  gift  which  then  is  most 
truly  free  when  it  serves  most  impersonally  in  the  cause 
of  truth. 

It  is  my  belief  that  both  in  the  English  Church  and  outside 
it  there  is  a  large  and  increasing  number  of  earnest  persons 
who  fully  recognise  the  connection  between  the  writings  of 
the  Fathers  and  their  own  religious  position,  but  who  desire 
to  approach  the  study  of  them  from  a  somewhat  less  technical 


xii  PREFACE. 

point  of  view  than  that  usual  in  theological  works.  To  such, 
whether  professed  students  or  not,  I  venture  to  submit  this 
sun-ey  of  early  Christian  literature  as  embodying  a  chapter 
second  to  none  in  significance  in  the  history  of  man's  s^Dirit, 
and  contributing  results  of  undying  value  to  the  treasure- 
house  of  man's  intelligence. 


KiBwoRTH  Rectory, 
Easter  1893. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTION. 

PAGES 

Literature  of  Ante-Nicene  Church  exclusively  theological — Reasons 
of  this — Failure  of  the  Imperial  regime  to  satisfy  the  aspirations 
of  mankind — Task  which  the  Apostles  and  their  followers  set 
before  them — Ante-Nicene  literature  inferior  to  the  classical  in 
variety — Three  periods  of  early  Christian  literature,  the  Apostolic, 
the  Ante-Nicene,  and  the  Post-Nicene — Heretical  systems  due 
to  the  intrusion  of  a  Pagan  element — Indebtedness  of  Christian 
theology  to  Greek  metaphysics — Value  of  the  patristic  writings 
— Comparison  between  the  early  ages  of  Christianity  and  our  own 
time — Different  solutions  of  the  problem  of  the  universe — Witness 
of  the  Fathers  to  the  authenticit}'  of  the  Gospels  .         .         .        1-19 


BOOK  I— THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

CHAPTER  I. 

GENERAL  REMARKS. 

Gap  in  our  information  between  close  of  New  Testament  and  rise  of 
dogmatic  Christianity — Apostolic  Fathers  tell  us  little — Their 
writings  the  subjects  of  keen  controversy — Features  common  to 
them  all — Distinctive  characters  of  each — Three  of  them  pre- 
eminently apostolic,  Clement,  Ignatius,  and  Polycarp — The  othei's 
less  important       ..........     21-27 

CHAPTER  11. 

CLEMENT  OF  ROME  (fl.  a.d.  95?). 

Next  to  nothing  known  of  his  history — The  Roman  episcopal  succession 
— Was  Clement  identical  with  Flavius  Clemens  ? — Government 
and  characteristics  of  the  Roman  Church — His  relation  to  the 
New  Testament — Shows  a  conciliatory  tendency — His  dogmatic 
position — Character  of  his  mind  and  genius — Historical  notices  of 
the  Epistle— Its  estimation  in  the  Church — Extracts    .         .         .     28-39 


xiv  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  IlL 
THE  PSEUDO-CLEMENT. 

PAGES 

The  so-called  Second  Epistle  of  Clement — Its  probable  date  (^.D.  loo- 
140) — Its  relation  to  the  New  Testament  Canon — The  two  Epistles 
on  Virginity — The  two  Epistles  to  James 40-44 

CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  EPISTLE  OF  BARNABAS  (a.d.  75?). 

Arguments  for  and  against  its  genuineness — Written  in  Alexandria — 
Its  date — Its  Christology — Authorities  for  the  text — Connection 
with  the  Didache — Its  argument — Its  exegesis — Extracts — Points 
of  divergence  from  received  tradition   ......     45~5^ 


CHAPTER  Y. 

THE  DIDACHE,  OR  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE 
APOSTLES  (A.D.  90?). 

History  of  its  discovery — Its  immense  interest — The  Two  Ways — A 
Church  manual — Primitive  condition  of  the  Church  revealed  in 
it — Relation  to  the  Old  and  New  Testaments — Place  of  composi- 
ticm — Translation  of  the  work       .......     57-71 


CHAPTER  YI. 

IGNATIUS  (A.D.  40-115?). 

Authorities  for  his  biography— Circumstances  preceding  his  death — 
Etymology  of  his  name — Discussion  as  to  the  genuineness  of  the 
letters  ascribed  to  him— Lightfoot's  summing  up  of  the  evidence — 
Reasons  for  the  paucity  of  Christian  writings  during  the  sub- 
apostolic  period — The  main  contributions  of  Ignatius  to  theology — 
His  views  on  episcopacy — Specimens  of  his  style — Characteristics 
of  his  mind  and  genius 72-92 


CHAPTER  YII. 

POLYCARP  (A.D.  69?-i55). 

disciple  of  S.  John — His  life — His  disciples — His  martyrdom — 
Genuineness  of  his  Epistle — The  Letter  of  the  Church  of  Smyrna — 
It  contrasts  favourably  with  most  other  "  Act>  of  Martyrdom"  .     93-IOI 


CONTENTS.  XV 

CHAPTER  VIII 
PAPIAS  AND  THE  ASIATIC  ELDERS  (a.d.  70-150?) 

PAGES 

School  of  S.  John  at  Ephesus — Account  of  Papias'  work — John  the 
Apostle  and  John  the  Elder — Papias  held  Millenarian  views — 
Gives  an  account  of  S.  Mark's  Gospel — The  object  Papias  set 
before  him  in  his  book — Irenaeus  indebted  to  him— Other  elders 
quoted  by  Irenseus 102- no 

CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  "SHEPHERD  OF  HERMAS." 

Its  peculiar  character — Biography  of  Hermas — Sketch  of  the  contents 
of  the  Shepherd — Its  high  repute  in  the  Church — Modern  views 
on  its  claim  to  inspiration — Its  relation  to  Holy  Scripture — Its 
date — Notices  of  it  by  Church  writers 111-127 


BOOK  II.— THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

CHAPTER  I. 

JEWISH  PERVERSIONS  OF  CHRISTIANITY— EBIONISM. 

Christianity  erected  on  foundation  of  Christ's  Messiahship— Limitations 
of  this  conception — Jewish  Christianity — Two  classes  of  Ebionites 
— Gnostic  Ebionism — Elchasaites — Connection  with  Essenism — 
Attempts  to  proselytise — Their  influence  exaggerated         .         .   131- 1 35 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE  CLEMENTINE  LITERATURE. 

List  of  documents  purporting  to  emanate  from  Clement — Homilies 
and  Recognitions — Autobiography  of  Clement — Ascents  of  James 
— Letter  of  Clement  to  S.  James — The  Epitome— These  works 
unorthodox  in  several  particulars — Their  conciliatory  object — The 
True  Prophet — Depreciation  of  S.  Paul — Date  of  the  work — Place 

of  composition 136-150 

h 


xvi  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  III. 

THE  EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE. 

PAGES 

The  Fathers,  as  a  rule,  learned,  not  popular,  writers— A  genuine  popular 
literature  existed  from  early  times,  but  was  largely  heretical  in 
origin — It  consisted  of  Apocalypses,  Apocryphal  Gospels,  and 
Apocryphal  Acts — Apocalypse  of  Peter :  early  notices  of  the  work  : 
account  of  its  partial  recovery  :  extracts  :  its  connection  with  the 
Sibylline  Oracles — Other  Apocalypses — Apocryphal  Gospels,  viz. 
(i)  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews — not  originally  heretical  ; 

(2)  Gospel  according  to  the  Egyptians — had  a  Gnostic  colouring  ; 

(3)  Gospel  according  to  Peter  :  its  Docetic  tendency:  translation 
of  the  recovered  fragment — Other  Gospels — The  Protevangelium — 
Gospel  of  the  Infancy  of  Mary — Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  or  Acts 
of  Pilate  ;  (4)  Apocryphal  Acts — the  earliest  of  them  Judaeo- 
Christian — Leucius   Charinus — Lipsius'   criticism — Acts   of   Paul 

and  Thecla — Apocalypse  of  Moses 151-180 


CHAPTER  IV. 

ON  GNOSTICISM  IN  GENERAL. 

On  the  rise  of  heresy— Relation  between  faith  and  knowledge — Gnostic 
dualism — Origin  of  evil — Effect  of  Gnosticism  on  morals — Theories 
of  Creation — Effects  on  doctrine  ;  on  Scripture  exegesis    .         .   1 81-193 

CHAPTER  V. 

FIRST  DIVISION:  GNOSTIC  SECTS  NOT  IN  ANTA- 
GONISM TO  JUDAISM— SIMON— CERINTHUS— 
DOCETISM. 

Simon  Magus  :  how  far  a  historical  personage — Sect  of  Simonians — 
Cerinthus  :  his  relations  withS.  John — Julius  Cassianus — Docetism 
of  the  early  Gnostics 1 94- 1 98 


CHAPTER  YI. 

BASILIDES  AND  THE  PSEUDO-BASILIDEANS. 

Ancient  authorities  for  the  views  of  Basilides — Summary  of  his  philo- 
sophy— Ethical  aspect  of  his  doctrine — Discipline  and  worship 
— General  characteristics  of  his  system — Isidore — The  pseudo- 
Basilideans  not  genuine  followers  of  Basilides    ....  199-207 


CONTENTS.  xvii 

CHAPTER  YII. 

VALENTINUS  AND  THE  VALENTINIANS. 

_,  .  PAGES 

The  most  influential  of  the  early  heretics — Philosophy  of  religion- 
Facts  of  his  life — His  theology— The  doctrine  of  ^ons— The 
Pleroma — Sophia  and  Achamoth — The  Demiurge — His  theory  of 
Redemption — His  anthropology — His  doctrine  of  the  Messiah — 
The  Soter — The  Spiritual  and  Hylic  natures — Marcus — Heracleon 
— Ptolemaeus — His  theory  of  the  Law        .         .         .         .         .  208-222 

CHAPTER  YIII. 

SECOND  DIVISION :  THE  ANTI-JUDAIC  GNOSTIC  SYS- 
TEMS: OPHITES— CARPOCRATES— BARD  AISAN— 
JULIUS  CASSIANUS. 

The  Ophites  hardly  to  be  considered  as  Christians — Carpocrates — 
Immorality  of  his  views — Epiphanes— Sethites,  Cainites,  and 
Nicolaitans— Bardaisan  or  Bardesanes — His  Book  of  the  Laws  of 
Countries — Less  heretical  than  other  Gnostics — His  sect  almost 
confined  to  Syria — Julius  Cassianus  holds  Encratite  views — Pistis- 
Sophia — Questions  of  Mary 223-232 

CHAPTER  IX. 

MARCION  AND  HIS  SCHOOL. 

The  noblest  of  the  Gnostics — His  genius  not  speculative  but  practical — 
Incidents  of  his  career — Borrows  his  philosophy  from  the  Syrian 
Cerdo — Relations  with  Polycarp— The  Creator  of  the  world  an 
Evil  Being — HisDocetic  Christology— The  love  of  God  opposed  to 
His  justice— The  Old  Testament  contrary  to  the  New — Marcion's 
Gospel — His  antitheses — Apelles — Controverted  by  Rhodon — Her- 
mogenes — His  Stoic  affinities — Theory  of  the  eternity  of  matter   233-241 

CHAPTER  X. 

THE  EARLY  UNITARIAN  TEACHERS. 

Monarchianism — Two  forms  of  it,  one  approximating  to  Deism,  the 
other  to  Pantheism  —  The  sect  of  the  Alogi  —  Theodotus  of 
Byzantium — Artemon  :  his  rationalistic  theology — Relation  of 
the  Roman  Church  to  Monarchianism  —  Beryllus  of  Bostra — 
Refuted  by  Origen — Paul  of  Samosata — His  life  and  character — 
His  Christology — Conflict  between  him  and  the  Catholic  bishops 
— His  relations  with  Zenobia — Intervention  of  Aurelian — Praxeas 
—  The  Patripassian  theory  —  Tertullian's  treatise  "  Against 
Praxeas  " — Noetus — Sabellius — His  explanation  of  the  Trinity — 
His  Christology — General  summary  of  heretical  teaching  .         .  242-254 


xviii  CONTENTS. 

BOOK  III— THE  APOLOGISTS  (a.d.   130-250). 

CHAPTER  I. 

THE  APOLOGETIC  LITERATURE— GENERAL  REMARKS. 

PAGES 

The  Christian  faith  had  four  chief  forces  to  contend  with  (i)  Judaism, 
-  (2)  Philosophy,  (3)  Pagan  religion,  (4)  the  State — (i)  Judaism — 
Inflexible~conservatism  of  the  Jews  with  regard  to  the  Ceremonial 
Law — A  few  liberal  spirits  here  and  there,  as  Philo  and  Trypho — 
Points  made  by  the  Christian  controversialists  against  the  Jews — 
Net  result  of  the  controversy  the  establishment  of  a  Christian 
interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament  —  (2)  Philosophy — Greek 
I  philosophy  contained  a  genuinely  spiritual  element — Compared 
i  with  Hebrew  prophecy — Explanation  of  its  opposition  to  Chris- 
V  tianity — The  best  philosophers  not  unwiUing  to  give  it  a  hearing — 
Christian  writers  except  Alexandrian  school  opposed  to  philosophy 
— (3)  Pagan  religions — We  must  not  deny  to  pagans  a  sincere 
religious  conviction — Break-up  of  the  old  faiths  tended  to  end  in 
the  worship  of  Csesar — The  higher  minds  took  refuge  in  the 
Mysteries — Reaction  of  the  Mysteries  on  Christian  thought — 
Revival  of  religious  enthusiasm  in  the  second  century — Christians 
regarded  as  Atheists — Suspected  of  unnatural  crimes — (4)  The 
State — Attitude  of  Roman  law  towards  religious  beliefs — Apparent 
inconsistency  of  its  attitude  towards  Christianity  explained — 
Christianity  an  unlicensed  religion — Laws  against  clubs — Empire 
not  excusable  for  its  neglect  to  inquire  into  the  true  nature  of  the 
Christian  faith 257-276 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE  DIFFERENT  CLASSES  OF  APOLOGISTS. 

First  Classification  of  apologetic  writings  into  those  addressed  to  the 
Civil  Power  and  those  addressed  to  the  public — Second  Classifi- 
cation into  those  addressed  to  Jews  and  those  addressed  to 
heathens — Third  Classification  into  those  which  are  based  on  the 
Immanence  of  Deity  and  those  which  are  not,  corresponding  to 
Eastern  and  Western  Christianity — To  first  class  belong  Justin, 
Athenagoras,  Clement,  and  Origen — To  an  intermediate  section 
belong  Tatian,  Irenseus,  the  writer  to  Diognetus,  and  to  some 
extent  Tertullian — The  former  section  admits  Greek  philosophy 
to  be  a  divinely  appointed  medium  of  truth,  the  other  section 
denies  this — The  second  class  of  apologists  includes  Amobius  and 
Lactantius  and  (at  a  later  date)  S.  Augustine — The  treatment  of 
Christian  evidences  varies  in  accordance  with  this  fundamental 


CONTENTS.  xix 


difference  of  principle — The  spiritual  proof  is  most  relied  on  by 
Clement  and  Origen,  the  external  by  Justin  and  TertuUian, 
though  these  admit  also  the  internal  or  spiritual  proof — Influence 
of  Plato  on  the  Greek  apologists — All  schools  of  apologists  agree 
in  accepting  the  authority  of  Scripture  and  the  concurrent  voice 
^pf  the  Church  as  final 277-287 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE     EARLIEST    APOLOGISTS— ARISTIDES— QUADRA- 
TUS—AGRIPPA  CASTOR— ARISTO  OF  PELLA. 

Remarkable  discovery  of  the  lost  Apology  of  Aristides — The  Armenian 
monks — History  of  Barlaam  and  Joasaph — Fragment  of  an  early 
Creed — Date  of  Aristides — Quadratus — Doubts  as  to  his  identity 
— Agrippa  Castor — Aristo  of  Pella,  the  author  of  the  dialogue 
between  Jason  and  Papiscus 288-295 


CHAPTER  IV. 

ATHENAGORAS— EPISTLE  TO  DIOGNETUS—DIONYSIUS 
OF  CORINTH— MAXIMUS—THEOPHILUS. 

Progress  of  the  Athenian  Church — Mutual  influence  of  Jew  and  Greek 
— Philosophical  character  of  Athenagoras'  writings — Hermias — 
The  Letter  to  Diognetus,  a  gem  of  Christian  thought — Conjectures 
as  to  its  authorship — Birks'  theory — Its  date  must  remain  uncertain 
— Sketch  of  its  argument — Extracts — Should  be  compared  with 
Justin  and  Athenagoras — Dionysius  of  Corinth  (a.d.  170)  an 
energetic  administrator  and  prolific  writer  of  epistles — Controversy 
with  Pinytus — Complains  that  his  works  were  interpolated — Gives 
much  interesting  information  as  to  the  state  of  the  Church — 
Maximus — Dialogue  on  Matter  —  Its  argument  borrowed  by 
Methodius — Theophilus  of  Antioch — Sketch  of  his  argument — 
Alludes  to  his  conversion  by  reading  the  Old  Testament — Parallel 
story  of  a  Japanese  philosopher — His  attitude  to  Greek  mythology 
more  severe  than  that  of  Justin 296-3 1 6 


CHAPTER  y. 

yUSTIN  MARTYR  (a.d.  i  10-164). 

Best  known  of  the  apologists — His  nationality — Story  of  his  conversion 
— Residence  at  Ephesus  and  Rome — His  martyrdom — Three 
only  of  his  writings  genuine — First  Apology — Its  remarkable 
dedication — Its   account   of   the   Eucharist  —  Second   Apology — 


XX  CONTENTS. 


Justification  of  the  Christians'  conduct— Dialogue  with  Trypho— 
Trypho's  objections  weighty — First  objection,  that  the  law,  being 
Divine,  must  be  binding — Justin's  answer — Second  objection, 
that  salvation  cannot  be  effected  by  a  human  Saviour — Justin's 
doctrine  of  the  Incarnation — He  occupies  an  original  position  in 
Church  literature — His  bequests  to  Christian  thought — A  reason- 
able theology— Conception  of  the  Logos  as  the  Divine  Reason 
immanent  in  humanity — The  Spermatic  Word — His  relation  to 
the  writings  of  the  New  Testament — His  style  ....  317-337 


CHAPTEK  VI. 

T  ATI  AN  (A.D.   110-180?). 

His  name  linked  with  that  of  Justin — Circumstances  of  his  conversion 
— His  oration  to  the  Greeks — Satirical  tone  of  it— He  drifts  into 
heresy — Encratism — His  Diatessaron — Notices  of  it  in  the  early 
Church — Process  of  its  re-discovery — Analysis  of  its  contents — 
An  important  witness  for  the  four  Gospels  ....  33^-351 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  CHURCH  HISTORY. 
HEGESIPPUS  (A.D.  ii5?-A.D.  185?). 

Early  rise  of  a  popular  religious  literature — Used  by  Papias  and 
Hegesippus,  but  neglected  by  the  great  controversial  writers — 
Discussion  of  the  orthodoxy  of  Hegesippus — His  narratives  of  the 
martyrdom  of  James  the  Just,  and  of  the  grandsons  of  Judas  before 
Domitian — Simple  piety  of  his  character 35^-36 1 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE  LATER  SCHOOL  OF  S.  JOHN—MELITO  TO 
POLYCRATES. 

Melito  of  Sardis — List  of  his  works — His  able  statement  of  the  double 
nature  of  Christ — TertuUian's  criticism  of  him — Spurious  writings 
circulated  in  the  Middle  Ages  under  his  name — Claudius  Apollinaris 
—  The  Thundering  Legion — Miltiades — Modestus — Polycrates — 
Took  a  leading  part  in  the  Paschal  controversy — Differences  of 
practice  in  observing  Easter — His  letter  to  Victor — Attitude  of 
Ante-Nicene  Christianity  to  apostolic  tradition — Vigorous  intel- 
lectual life  of  the  Asiatic  Church — Passage  from  Renan  quoted    362-373 


CONTENTS.  xxi 

CHAPTER  IX. 

IRENMUS  (A.D.   125-203?). 

PAGES 

Irenseus  the  founder  of  "  Orthodoxy  "  and  Church  polemics— Gentleness 
and  steadfastness  of  his  character — The  disciple  of  Polycarp — 
Visits  Rome— Elected  Bishop  of  Lyons— Intervenes  with  effect 
in  the  affairs  of  the  Church  at  large— Literary  qualifications— His 
great  work  against  heresies— Analysis  of  the  separate  books— His 
theory  of  the  fourfold  Gospel— His  Millenarian  proclivities— His 
views  on  eternal  punishment— Lightfoot's  high  estimate  of  his 
value— List  of  his  lost  works— His  influence  on  the  Christian 
^^"^^^        374-392 


APPENDIX  TO  CHAPTER  IX. 

LETTER  OF  THE  GALLICAN  CHURCHES. 

Irenseus  supposed  by  many  to  be  its  author— Encomiums  on  it  from 
critics  of  all  shades  of  opinion— Translation  of  the  entire  epistle, 
as  preserved  by  Eusebius 393-403 

CHAPTER  X. 

THE  GRMCO-ROMAN  SCHOOL  — MURATORI AN  FRAG- 
MENT —  HIPPOLYTUS,  CAWS,  VICTOR,  AND 
OTHERS. 

(A.D.    17(^235?). 

Roman  Church  had  from  the  first  assumed  a  position  of  moral 
authority— Retention  of  the  Greek  language  in  her  public  docu- 
ments an  obstacle  to  its  successful  exercise — By  middle  of  third 
century  Roman  Church  thoroughly  Latinised  —  Her  path  to 
dominion  was  now  becoming  clear — Muratorian  fragment  on  the 

canon  —  A   translation   from   the   Greek  —  Its   probable   date 

Hippolytus— Conflicting  notices  of  his  position— His  chair— His 
extant  work— His  antagonism  to  the  bishops  of  his  day— His  see 
or  episcopal  charge  at  Portus— His  biography  of  Callistus— His 
list  of  heresies— Other  works  ascribed  to  him— His  orthodoxy— 
Caius  the  presbyter— Victor— Apollonius—Rhodon— His  contro- 
versy with  Apelles— Serapion— His  notice  of  the  Gospel  of  Peter 
—Apollonius  —  Writes  against  the  Montanists  —  Answered  by 
Tertullian 404-426 


xxii  CONTENTS. 

BOOK  IV.— THE  ALEXANDRIAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY 

(a.d.   175-300)- 

CHAPTER  I. 

GENERAL  REMARKS. 

PAGES 

Alexandria  becomes  the  centre  of  Christian  thought  —  Different 
elements  which  met  there — Thought  wholly  free — Institutions 
eminently  favourable  to  philosophic  candour  of  mind — The  Church 
rose  to  her  opportunity — The  Catechetical  school — Pantgenus — 
Endeavours  to  harmonise  Christianity  with  the  best  human 
thought — Progress  of  Greek  philosophy  towards  conceptions  which 
could  be  assimilated  by  the  Church — Platonism  of  Philo — Neo- 
Platonism — Difficulty  of  the  task  undertaken  by  the  Alexandrian 
Catechists 429-438 

CHAPTER  II. 

CLEMENT  (A.D.  145-220?). 

The  most  original  spirit  of  the  Ante-Nicene  Church — His  life — His 
literary  training  —  Catalogue  of  his  writings  —  Their  varied 
character — His  theological  principles — Approaches  Christianity 
wholly  free  from  Jewish  prepossessions — Conceives  of  God  as 
man's  Instructor,  disciplining  him  for  perfection — Human  pro- 
gress, forward  and  backward,  made  intelligible  by  Jesus  Christ — 
Redemption  consists  chiefly  in  enlightenment  —  The  Christian 
Gnostic  —  Asserts  freedom  of  the  human  will;  but  does  not 
wholly  clear  himself  of  a  certain  dualism,  viz.,  that  of  the  lower 
and  higher  believers — Views  on  Scripture  and  the  Church — 
Defects  of  his  theology  from  the  orthodox  point  of  view — Short 
notices  of  his  three  works,  the  Protrepticus,  the  Psedagogus, 
the  Stromateis  —  Accounted  as  a  saint,  but  erased  from  the 
Calendar  by  Clement  VIII 439-461 

CHAPTER  III. 
.^^-     ORIGEN  (A.D.  185-253)— H/S  LIFE. 

Part  I. 

His  greatness — His  reputation  injured — Lived  in  an  age  of  transition 
— His  life  divided   into  two  periods,   {a)   at  Alexandria,   (b)   at 


CONTENTS.  xxiii 

PAGES 

Csesarea — Anecdotes  of  his  boyhood —  Appointed  to  the  cateche- 
tical chair — Austerity  of  his  life — His  intercourse  with  Ammonius 
Sacas — Visit  to  Rome — Takes  Heraclas  as  his  assistant — Thorough- 
ness of  his  educational  method — While  at  Cc"esarea  is  licensed  to 
preach — Recalled  by  Demetrius — Friendship  with  Ambrosius — 
The  Hexapla — Various  missions  abroad — Ordained  presbyter  by 
Theoctistus  and  Alexander — Incurs  the  anger  of  Demetrius — Is 
deposed  from  the  priesthood  and  ordered  to  quit  Alexandria — 
Continues  his  theological  studies  at  Caesarea — Discussion  with 
Beryllus — His  "Contra  Celsum" — Death  of  Ambrosius — Death 
of  Origen  at  Tyre 462-479 


CHAPTER  IV. 

ORIGEN— HIS    THEOLOGICAL    SYSTEM,    INFLUENCE 
AND  LITERARY  GENIUS. 

Part  II. 

The  first  systematic  theologian — Quite  as  much  a  philosopher  as  a 
theologian — Egyptian  and  Greek  influences  combine  to  form  his 
mind — Summary  of  his  views  under  four  heads — (i)  Exegesis  of 
Scripture :  he  accepts  its  inspiration  —  the  Father  of  Biblical 
criticism — his  textual  labours — his  system  of  interpretation — 
allegorical  method  scientifically  unsound — not  intended  by  Origen 
to  cramp  the  intelligence — much  influenced  by  Plato's  philosophy  ; 

(2)  Dogmatic  theology:  aims  at  being  an  explanation  of  the 
universe — the  Deity — doctrine  of  the  Trinity — of  creation — the 
ascent  and  descent  of  souls — freedom  asserted  both  of  God  and 
man — the  human  soul  of  Christ — defective  views  of  redemption ; 

(3)  Apologetic  theory  :  the  True  Word  of  Celsus — Origen's  reply 
centres  round  the  Incarnation  as  the  ground-truth  of  Christianity 
— the   fullest  and    most  convincing  of   all   apologetic   treatises ; 

(4)  Ecclesiastical  a7id practical  vieivs :  Origen  spiritualises  Christian 
ethics — regards  knowledge  when  joined  with  love  as  the  goal  of 
Christian  perfection — a  vein  of  literalism  still  remained  in  him — 
ecclesiastical  ideas  not  his  strong  point — organisation  of  the 
Church  hardly  alluded  to  by  him — the  Church  a  purely  spiritual 
body — Eschatological  views — His  influence  on  Christianity  per- 
manent in  three  directions  :  first,  in  his  confidence  that  truth 
can  be  attained  ;  second,  in  his  treatment  of  Scripture  as  a  living 
divine  voice  ;  third,  in  his  absolute  confidence  in  the  final  victory  of 
God's  love— Literary  qualities — Suffers  from  over-productiveness 

— Contrasted  with  Tertullian 480-512 


XXIV  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  V. 
THE  SUCCESSORS  OF  ORIGEN. 

PAGES 

Several  of  his  pupils  occupied  the  See  of  Alexandria — His  influence 
there  lasted  for  a  century  —  Alexander  of  Jerusalem  —  Julius 
Africanus — His  Chronicon — His  Cesti — His  criticism  on  the  story 
of  Susanna — Gregory  Thaumaturgus — His  life — Selections  from 
his  writings — Panegyric  on  Origen — Dionysius  of  Alexandria — 
His  reasonableness  in  controversy — His  criticism  on  the  Book  of 
Revelation — His  relations  with  the  Roman  See — Compared  with 
Cyprian — Later  Origenists — Pamphilus  of  Csesarea,  friend  of 
Eusebius — Lucian  of  Antioch — Methodius  ....  513-535 


BOOK    v.— LATIN    CHRISTIANITY. 

CHAPTER  I. 

LATIN  THEORY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

Christianity  hitherto  has  moved  in  a  Greek  world — Conception  of  the 
Church  in  accordance  with  the  fundamental  ideas  of  Greek  philo- 
sophy an  ideal  one,  viz.,  the  company  of  believing  people — Latin 
conception  of  Church  that  of  a  visible  society,  expressing  the 
apparatus  of  salvation,  not  the  fact  of  it — Order  or  law  the  basis 
of  this  conception— Its  speculative  foundations  laid  by  Tertullian, 
Cyprian,  and  Augustine — Two  documents  of  the  first  importance 
— Tertullian's  de  Prcescriptione  Hereticorum  and  Cyprian's  de 
Unitate  Ecdesiae — Other  Latin  writers  are  of  secondary  interest  539-545 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE  AFRICAN  CHURCH— Q.  SEPTIMIUS  FLORENS 
TERTULLIANUS  (a.d.  160-230?). 

Part  I. 
The  rise  of  New  Carthage — Carthage  as  a  Christian  centre — Tertullian 
her  first  eminent  Churchman — His  remarkable  personality — First 
bent  the  Latin  language  to  ecclesiastical  expression — Exaggeration 
of  tone,  but  genuine  belief  underlying  it — General  orthodoxy  in 
fundamental  doctrines — Tertullian  and  Montanism— Some  account 
of  Montanus  and  his  doctrine — Permanent  elements  in  Montanism 
(a)  The  conflict  between  the  natural  and  supernatural  ;  [h)  the 
dispensation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  ;  (c)  the  prophetical  office  of  the 
Church  ;  {d)  the  distinction  between  the  visible  and  invisible 
Churches 546-559 


CONTENTS.  XXV 

CHAPTER  III. 

TERTULLIAN'S  WRITINGS. 

Part  II. 

PAGES 

Partly  orthodox,  partly  Montanist — Divided  into  four  groups — (i.) 
Apologetic  Treatises :  the  most  forcible  of  all,  especially  his  cele- 
brated Apology — Short  summary  of  its  main  points — Translation 
of  its  peroration — Address  to  the  Soul — His  intense  appreciation 
of  the  claims  of  Revelation — His  treatise  against  the  Jews  :  (2.) 
Controversial  writings:  The  Prescription  of  Heretics — Appeal  to 
Holy  Scripture — Treatise  against  Marcion ;  its  literary  history — 
Works  against  Valentinus  and  Praxeas  —  Different  forms  of 
Monarchianism  :  (3. )  Dogmatic  Treatises :  On  Baptism ;  his 
materialising  view  of  the  sacrament — Christological  treatises — 
Interpretation  of  Scripture — His  psychology— Treatise  on  Prayer 
— Curious  customs  of  the  African  churches  :  (4.)  Moral  and 
Practical  works :  His  views  on  persecution  and  martyrdom — The 
de  S}-)ectaculis ;  extract  from  it^His  views  on  the  authority  of 
tradition — Treatises  on  female  behaviour — On  the  relation  of  the 
sexes — "On  monogamy — On  penitence  and  fasting — On  patience — 
Want  of  Christian  charity  in  his  later  works — General  summary 
of  his  qualities 560-592 

CHAPTER  ly. 

CYPRIAN  (A.D.  2oo?-257). 

Born  in  a  good  position — Converted  in  middle  life — Elected  bishop 
soon  after  his  ordination — Estimate  of  his  character — Contro- 
versies in  which  he  took  part— Dispute  as  to  treatment  of  the 
lapsed — Laxity  of  Church  discipline  combated  by  Cyprian — His 
statesmanlike  mind — Arrogance  of  the  Confessors — Dispute  as  to 
rebaptism  of  heretics — Cyprian  opposes  Stephen  of  Rome — Three 
synods  of  African  bishops — Final  judgment  of  the  Church  at  the 
Council  of  Aries — Criticism  of  his  literary  qualities — His  tract  on 
the  Unity  of  the  Church — The  supremacy  of  Peter — Cyprian's 
views  as  to  the  decay  of  the  world — Triumphant  tone  of  his 
argument — His  martyrdom  and  canonisation      ....  593-612 

CHAPTER  V. 

ROMAN  CHURCH— MINUCIUS  FELIX— NOVATIAN. 

Discussion  as  to  date  and  nationality  of  Minucius — Analysis  of  the 
argument  of  the  Octavius— Its  imperfect  dogmatic  position— Its 
literary  history — Novatian — His  life — His  Puritanism — His  ambi- 
tion— His  writings — Christology  of  the  de  Trinitate — Novatus     613-629 


XXVI  CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

ARNOBIUS  (FL.  A.D.  200?)  — LACTANTIUS  (a.d.  240-325?)— 
COMMODIAN  (A.D.  260})— VICT ORINUS  PETAVIENSIS. 

PAGES 

Inferiority  of  these  African  theologians  to  those  of  the  Alexandrian 
school  —  Arnobius  a  rhetorician — His  successful  refutation  of 
Paganism — His  treatment  of  the  argument  that  the  world  is  in 
a  state  of  decay,  and  that  this  is  due  to  Christianity — Despairing 
scepticism  of  the  age — Estimate  of  his  work — Lactantius — His 
life  and  character — List  of  his  works — The  Divine  Institutions — 
A  philosopher  rather  than  a  theologian — Defects  of  his  dogmatic 
system — Commodian — Victorinus  of  Pettau       ....  630-653 

Conclusion 654-657 


List  of  Authors  from  whose  Works  Specimen  Passages  are 

Translated *      .        .        .  658-659 

Index 661-686 

Index  to  Greek  Words 684 

Index  to  Latin  Words 686 


A  LITEEAEY 
HISTOKY  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY. 

INTEODUCTION. 

The  literature  of  the  first  three  centuries  of  the  Church 
differs  in  this  respect  from  all  other  literatures,  that  it  is 
wholly  theological  and  religious.^  The  remark  may  be  applied 
with  almost  equal  accuracy  to  the  centuries  that  immediately 
follow.  And  if  to  these  we  add  the  entire  mediaeval  period, 
with  all  its  complex  life,  we  shall  still  find  the  same  state- 
ment substantially  true.  No  doubt,  in  this  latter  period, 
some  forms  of  secular  thought  emerge  and  find  a  more  or 
less  articulate  utterance.  But  speaking  broadly  and  popu- 
larly, we  may  assert  that  the  long  succession  of  ages  from 
the  time  of  the  New  Testament  to  the  Revival  of  Letters,  if 
not  absolutely  restricted  to  theological  modes  of  expression, 
is  dominated  throughout  by  a  theological  spirit.  This  is 
surely  a  very  striking  phenomenon.  Theological  ideas  are 
not  so  easily  grasped  as  to  form  the  natural  clothing  of  man's 
thought,  nor  so  comprehensive  as  to  cover  its  entire  field. 
Nor,  if  we  survey  the  history  of  those  other  literatures  which 
have  most  powerfully  influenced  mankind,  shall  we  find  any 
adequate  parallel.  The  literatures  of  India,  of  Persia,  of 
Islam,  though  springing  from  a  religious  source,  and  long- 
confined  within  a  religious  sphere,  include  many  other  ele- 
ments.     Even  the   Scriptures  of   the   Old  Testament    and 

^  So  absolutely  is  this  the  case,  that  the  authorship  of  the  "  Cesti,"abook 
attributed  on  good  authority  to  Julius  Africanus,  has  been  strongly  ques- 
tioned on  the  sole  ground  that  it  deals  with  secular  topics.     See  Bk.  iv.  ch.  5. 

A 


2  INTRODUCTION. 

Apocr3rpha  display  numerous  features  that  are  not  wholly 
spiritual.  They  embrace  history,  law,  politics,  poetry,  legend. 
How  comes  it,  then,  that  for  so  immense  a  period  Christian 
literature  was  so  predominantly  theological  ? 

The  cause  is  twofold.  On  the  one  hand,  the  transcendent 
power  of  the  central  Christian  truth,  which  set  itself  to  trans- 
form the  entire  attitude  of  the  human  mind  to  knowledge ; 
on  the  other,  the  inevitable  reaction  from  the  long  and  exclu- 
sive dominion  of  the  secular  intelligence.  The  world  into 
which  Christianity  entered  was  emphatically  a  secular  world. 
Its  philosophy,  its  poetry,  its  law,  were  all  the  products  of 
man's  natural  wisdom,  and  addressed  themselves  to  his  hopes 
and  fears  as  concerned  with  this  present  world.  For  his 
spiritual  instincts,  for  his  aspirations  after  holiness,  they 
made  no  provision.  It  is  true  that  among  the  higher  minds 
many  lofty  ideas  on  religion  had  been  reached.  Noble  souls, 
true  seekers  after  God,  strove  to  raise  men's  minds  to  the 
heights  of  contemplation,  and,  by  explaining  the  order  of  the 
universe,  to  inculcate  indifference  to  external  things  and 
arouse  an  enthusiasm  for  the  supreme  good.  But  these 
heroic  spirits  stood  almost  if  not  quite  alone.  It  is  doubtful 
whether  they  greatly  influenced  the  lives  even  of  the  small 
number  who  could  understand  their  thoughts.  It  is  certain 
that  they  left  wholly  untouched  the  vast  multitude  beneath. 
The  subject  nations  of  the  Empire,  mechanically  united  but 
spiritually  heterogeneous,  were  ready  enough  to  yield  obedi- 
ence to  Csesar's  power ;  but  when,  amid  the  chaos  of  fallen 
religions,  they  asked  for  a  god  to  worship,  no  god  was  offered 
them  but  that  very  Ceesar  whom  their  own  hands  had  fashioned 
— an  undoubted,  unmistakable  idol. 

It  was  impossible  that  such  a  system  could  end  otherwise 
than  in  failure.  Men  asked  for  bread  and  were  given  a 
stone.  The  age  was,  indeed,  profoundly  conscious  of  its 
misery.  1  The  great  spiritual  void  could  be  filled  neither  by 
material  prosperity  nor  by  a  multitude  of  inconsistent  super- 

^  The  second  and  third  centuries  after  Christ,  though  differing  in  some 
respects,  are  sufficiently  alike  in  their  moral  condition  to  be  grouped 
together  in  a  general  survey. 


INTRODUCTION.  3 

stitions.  The  literature  that  has  come  down  to  us  represents 
the  thoughts  of  the  cultivated,  the  fortunate,  the  noble.  Yet 
it  displays  with  few  exceptions  a  spirit  of  indignant,  hopeless 
despair.  The  utmost  that  philosophy  could  do  for  man  was 
to  teach  him  how  to  yield  to  fate  ;  and  if  self-respect  forbade 
him  to  yield,  he  must  seek  an  escape  by  a  voluntary  death. 
Suicide  was  erected  into  a  virtue,  it  was  even  glorified  as 
man's  highest  privilege,  more  than  compensating  him  for  his 
outward  inferiority  to  the  gods.  A  profound  melancholy  or 
a  forced  hilarity  pervade  the  poetry  of  this  period  ;  bitter 
anger  or  unavailing  regret  form  the  burden  of  its  historians. 
The  soul  of  life  seemed  dead.  The  world  had  become  a  huge 
machine,  whose  vast  proportions  mocked  the  puny  efforts  of 
individuals. 

If  the  favoured  few  were  thus  depressed,  what  must  we 
imagine  to  have  been  the  condition  of  the  undistinguished, 
inarticulate  multitude  ?  Undoubtedly  the  Empire  had  given 
them  one  great  benefit  in  increased  personal  security.  But 
this  had  been  bought  at  too  high  a  price.  They  had  sacri- 
ficed all  freedom,  even  the  illusion  of  it.i  They  looked  to 
Kome  for  the  entire  mechanism  of  their  outward  life,  while 
their  national  gods  were  lost  to  them  through  their  indis- 
criminate adoption  into  the  Roman  pantheon.  Thus  bereft 
of  political  life,  bereft  of  religious  belief,  they  sank  into  the 
idle  frequenters  of  circus  and  arena,  or  sought  in  degrading 
superstitions  the  alternate  terror  and  amusement  which  re- 
flected but  too  truly  the  motive  forces  of  their  life. 

The  task  which  the  Apostles  and  their  followers  set  before 
them  from  the  outset  was  to  regenerate  the  human  mind. 
It  was  not  to  alter  some  of  its  convictions,  or  even  to  give 
men  certainty  instead  of  doubt,  knowledge  instead  of  igno- 
rance, but  it  was  to  destroy  the  dominion  of  falsehood  and 
to  set  up  that  of  truth ;  in  S.  Paul's  emphatic  language,  to 
make  a  new  creation.     The  efforts  of  all  former  teachers  had 

^  Luc.  Phars.  ix.  204,  205 — 

"  Olim  vera  fides  Sulla  Marioque  receptis 
Libertatis  obit :  Pompeio  rebus  adempto, 
Nunc  et  ficta  perit." 


4  INTRODUCTION. 

been  limited  to  a  small  circle  of  disciples.  Even  the  divinely 
given  mission  of  Moses  was  confined  to  a  single  race.  But 
from  the  first  the  proclamation  of  Christianity  was  not  made 
to  a  few  but  to  all ;  and  therefore  it  was  necessary  that  its 
watchword  should  be  not  merely  true  in  itself,  but  disengaged 
from  everything  that  could  localise,  limit,  or  obscure  it.  To 
bring  this  about,  it  was  necessary,  as  it  were,  to  dig  out  and 
expose  to  view  the  root-principle  of  the  Pagan  world,  and 
then  to  plant  another  principle  equally  comprehensive  in 
its  place.  The  root  from  which  the  entire  civilisation  of 
heathendom  grew  is  rightly  declared  by  Tertullian  to  be 
idolatry.  "  They  worshipped  the  creature  rather  than  the 
Creator,''  the  transient  instead  of  the  permanent,  the  phan- 
tom instead  of  the  reality.^  This  is  S.  Paul's  summary  of 
heathenism,  and  it  cannot  be  surpassed  in  its  insight.  It  is 
what  we  worship  that  at  bottom  decides  our  attitude  to  the 
external  world.  This  truth,  which  had  been  recognised  in 
earlier  and  better  periods,  had  in  the  time  of  the  Empire 
become  wholly  obscured.  It  was  this  truth  which  the  Church 
placed  in  the  van  of  her  teaching,  "  We  knoiv  what  we 
worship,'"" 

In  order  to  bring  home  to  man  the  power  of  this  truth  for 
his  salvation,  it  was  necessary  to  penetrate  every  department 
of  thought  and  conduct  with  its  inspiring  influence,  and  this 
involved  nothing  less  than  the  reconstruction  of  the  whole 
framework  of  humanity,  or,  as  Plato  expresses  it,  "  the  turn- 
ing round  of  man's  whole  soul  towards  the  light."  ^  For  such 
a  task  as  this  a  religious  literature  of  three,  four,  or  five 
centuries  can  hardly  seem  too  long ;  and  though  we  may 
regret  that  the  process  was  not  completed  in  the  generous 
spirit  in  which  it  was  begun,^  yet  its  greatness  cannot  be 
denied,  nor  the  patient  study  of  its  methods  be  deemed  a 
waste  of  time. 


^  Rom.  i.  25.     EtSwXoj/^a  phantom,  a  shadow,  not  a  graven  image. 

2  S.  John  iv.  22.  3  2  Plat.  Rep.  vii.  p.  518,  D. 

■*  The  attitude  of  the  early  fathers  as  of  the  Apostles  themselves  towards 
the  human  spirit  is  far  more  generous  and  sympathetic  than  that  of  the 
Latin  Church  from  Tertullian  onwards. 


INTRODUCTION.  5 

•  The  writings  of  the  Ante-Nicene  Fathers  do  not  exhibit 
that  variety  of  view,  that  sympathetic  play  of  intellect,  which 
lends  such  a  deathless  charm  to  the  secular  literature  of 
Greece  and  Rome.  But  these  very  deficiencies  bring  into 
relief  the  overwhelming  power  of  that  central  inspiration 
which  could  restrain  the  pride  of  learning,  and  force  into  a 
single  channel  the  most  versatile  gifts.  This  constant  self- 
repression  has  prevented  the  intellectual  relation  of  the 
Fathers  to  their  contemporaries  from  being  justly  estimated. 
Already  in  the  second  century  Christian  thinkers  rank  among 
the  abler  men  of  their  day,  and  in  the  third  and  fourth  they 
are  indisputably  superior  to  their  Pagan  rivals.  It  is  not 
that  men  like  Clement,  Origen,  Cyprian,  and  Tertullian  were 
not  fully  capable,  had  they  so  chosen,  of  adorning  many 
fields  of  literature  ;  but  that,  filled  with  the  master-impulse 
of  illuminating  things  human  by  things  divine,  they  concen- 
trated all  their  powers  on  the  work  of  tracing  man's  whole 
field  of  knowledge  direct  to  its  fountain-source. 

In  one  sense,  indeed,  and  that  the  most  obvious  one,  it 
must  be  allowed  that  they  failed.  For  we  are  able  to  discern 
what  they  were  not,  that  there  exists  a  sphere  of  human 
truth  as  real,  as  legitimate  as  that  of  divine  truth ;  nay  more, 
that  these  two  spheres  so  interpenetrate  one  another,  that 
many  domains  which  once  formed  branches  of  divinity  are 
now  clearly  seen  to  belong  to  human  learning,  and  yet  they 
have  by  no  means  lost  their  living  connection  with  the  Divine 
Spirit.i  ^ 

Yet  in  another  and  perhaps  a  higher  sense  they  may  be' 
said  to  have  succeeded;  for,  though  their  method  is  often 
faulty  and  their  results  erroneous,  they  did  good  service  to 
man's  progress  by  keeping  open  the  conception  of  a  revela- 
tion, i.e. J  a  source  of  truth  outside  the  human  mind.  No  one 
would  connect  Christianity  directly  with  the  rise  of  inductive 
science ;  and  yet  it  is  precisely  in  the  patient  observation  of 

^  E.g.,  ethics,  social  and  historical  science.  The  application  of  this 
thought  to  the  realm  of  physical  science  is  yet  to  come.  But  already  the 
theologian  is  beginning  to  realise  his  right  in  the  "Reign  of  Law,"  as 

most  precious  revelation  of  the  Mind  of  God. 


6  INTRODUCTION. 

the  Divine  operations,  and  in  the  unreserved  acceptance  of 
them  when  made  known,  which  are  so  characteristic  of  modern 
science,  that  we  may  trace  the  influence  of  Christianity,  and 
establish  the  main  difference  between  modern  and  ancient 
science ;  for  while  ancient  science  forced  nature  into  confor- 
mity with  its  own  a  priori  conceptions,  modern  science  is  con- 
tent to  interpret  the  universe  without  professing  to  measure  it. 

Therefore,  in  estimating  the  permanent  value  of  this 
Church  literature,  we  shall  do  well  to  keep  before  us  the 
object  it  strove  to  attain,  and  to  judge  of  its  importance  to 
progress  not  only  by  its  direct  contributions  to  knowledge, 
but  also  by  the  effect  it  had  in  lifting  mankind  to  that  loftier 
spiritual  platform,  by  means  of  which  the  triumphs  of  the 
modern  intellect  have  been  achieved. 

The  point  of  view  from  which  the  ecclesiastical  writers 
will  be  considered  in  the  present  volume  will  not  be  primarily 
theological,  nor,  indeed,  wholly  religious.  Regard  will  be  had 
also  to  their  general  bearings  on  the  history  of  the  human 
mind;  and  although  the  writings  passed  under  review  will 
be  almost  entirely  theological,  yet  the  extent  to  which  this 
element  enters  into  modern  thought  is  of  itself  sufficient  to 
prove  that  the  long  battle  of  theological  and  ecclesiastical 
controversy  was  not  waged  in  vain. 

In  striving  to  obtain  a  comprehensive  view  of  a  series  of 
writings  so  extensive  and  various,  the  critic  will  be  fain  to 
dwell  with  greater  interest  upon  the  purely  spiritual,  the 
philosophical,  or  the  controversial  side,  according  to  the  bent 
of  his  own  sympathies.  He  will  concentrate  his  attention  on 
the  metaphysical  subtleties  of  the  Eastern  Church,  or  on  the 
rhetorical  and  dogmatic  treatises  of  the  Western,  according 
as  his  turn  of  mind  is  speculative  or  practical.  But,  while 
appreciating  these  great  and  important  differences,  he  will 
bring  into  clear  relief  the  still  greater  and  more  vital  under- 
lying unity  which  binds  together  forms  of  genius  so  divergent, 
and  creates  a  type  of  literature  which  is  more  than  Eastern  or 
Western,  more  than  Hellenic  or  Barbaric,'more  than  ancient  or 
modern,  that  which  is  conveyed  by  the  title,  no  less  accurate 
than  familiar,  ''The  Literature  of  the  Universal  Church." 


INTRODUCTION.  7 

The  history  of  this  literature  presents  three  well-marked 
stages  —  first,  the  period  of  birth,  of  creative  energy  and 
force;  secondly,  the  period  of  growth,  of  controversy  and 
struggle ;  and  thirdly,  the  period  of  maturity,  which  is  also 
that  of  authority  and  rule. 

The  first  period  includes  the  Origines  of  Christianity 
down  to  the  close  of  the  Apostolic  era.  It  witnesses  the 
launching  of  the  new-born  truth  into  the  ocean  of  the  world, 
and  it  covers  all  the  phenomena  of  Christianity  that  are  truly 
original.  1  With  this  period,  flooded  as  it  is  with  divine  light, 
we  are  not  here  directly  concerned ;  but,  inasmuch  as  it  forms 
the  mainspring  and  source  of  all  subsequent  developments, 
it  will  be  as  well  to  state  what  were  its  grand  original  ideas, 
which  have  entered  into  and  enriched  the  spiritual  inheritance 
of  mankind.     They  are  four  in  number :  ^ — 

1 .  The  idea  of  the  Divine  Son  of  God  taking  man's  nature 
in  order  to  redeem  it. 

2.  The  idea  of  the  Brotherhood  of  redeemed  mankind  as 
sons  of  God  in  Christ. 

3.  The  idea  of  the  Church,  i.e.,  a  society  independent  of 
all  local  or  natural  ties,  founded  on  a  purely  spiritual  basis. 

4.  The  idea  of  love  to  God  and  man  as  the  one  sufficient 
motive  for  realising  human  perfection. 

Of  these  four  cardinal  points  of  Christianity,  all  due  to 
Christ  Himself,  three  at  least  were  absolutely  new  to  man- 
kind. The  other,  viz.,  the  Church,  had  already  been  antici- 
pated by  Sakya  Mouni  five  centuries  earlier  in  a  distant 
part  of  the  world,  though  in  connection  with  a  very  different 
moral  ideal. 

We  may  here  remark  that  it  is  precisely  these  root-ideas 
of  Christianity  which,  amid  all  the  changes  of  human  life, 
persist  in  showing  their  inherent  vitality  and  consequent 

1  Besides  the  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testament,  we  refer  to  the  practical 
labours  of  the  Apostles,  and  particularly  those  of  S.  John  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  first  century,  which  appear  in  the  establishment  of  Episcopacy, 
and  probably  of  liturgical  worship. 

~  The  reader  will  not  suppose  that  this  catalogue  is  presented  as  in  any 
sense  exhaustive.  It  rather  represents  the  points  in  which  Christianity 
stands  out  as  original  when  compared  with  the  Old  Testament. 


8  INTRODUCTION. 

superiority  to  all  later  superstructures  built  on  them. 
Translated  out  of  the  sphere  of  Divine  Revelation  into  that 
of  moral  or  social  science,  and  only  too  often  wrested  into  a 
shape  that  seems  to  belie  their  origin,  they  are  nevertheless 
mightily  at  work  in  human  society  to-day,  and  evidently 
hold  its  future  in  their  hand.  To  what  shall  we  ascribe  the 
growing  reverence,  almost  adoration,  paid  to  human  nature 
as  such,  in  glaring  contrast  to  its  dishonour  in  the  ancient 
world,  if  not  to  an  unconscious  acknowledgment  that  the 
Incarnation  of  Jesus  Christ  was  no  isolated  Divine  Fact, 
enacted  far  off  in  the  heaven  of  heavens,  but  a  process 
inherently  connected  with  the  Divine  Idea  of  manhood, 
which  by  it,  and  by  it  only,  has  been  made  capable  of 
realisation  ? 

To  what  shall  we  ascribe  the  tremendous  power  of  modern 
social  and  democratic  movements  if  not  to  an  irresistible, 
albeit  perverted,  acceptance  of  a  universal  brotherhood 
founded  upon  an  equality — social,  moral,  and  political  ?  to 
what  the  growing  impatience  of  dogmatic  restrictions,  if  not 
to  an  overmastering  desire  that  the  Church  Universal  shall 
express  itself  in  its  ideal  form  as  the  entire  human  race  ?  to 
what  the  pervading  anxiety  for  the  preservation  of  peace,  if 
not  to  the  conviction  that  man's  destiny  can  best  be  wrought 
out  by  love,  and  not  by  hate  ?  Doubtless  these  motives  are 
not  always  present  to  men's  minds  in  their  Christian  form. 
On  the  contrary,  to  multitudes  who  profess  them  every  em- 
bodiment of  the  Christian  faith  is  highly  distasteful.  Yet 
if  we  look  below  all  accidental  differences  to  the  essential 
springs  of  the  human  spirit,  we  shall  be  justified  in  connect- 
ing these  mighty  developments  with  their  source  in  Palestine 
eighteen  centuries  ago. 

The  second  period,  the  period  of  growth  and  struggle, 
includes  the  second  and  third  centuries,  A.D.  It  begins  with 
a  few  isolated  writings,  which  in  form  and  tendency  are  closely 
connected  with  the  preceding  age.  They  are  those  ranked  as 
sub-apostolic ;  and  in  spite  of  their  pronounced  inferiority  to 
the  New  Testament  Scriptures,  such  was  the  prestige  they 
enjoyed  from  their  antiquity  and   devotional  fervour,  that 


INTRODUCTION.  9 

large  portions  of  the  Church  regarded  them^as  inspired,  and 
allowed  their  use  in  Divine  service.  But  to  us  their  import- 
ance is  above  all  things  historical.  We  find  in  them  no  new 
spiritual  ideas,  no  broad  outlook  on  the  future  of  Chris- 
tianity. They  form  a  kind  of  back-water  of  apostolic  in- 
spiration, a  transitional  phase  between  the  truly  creative 
epoch  and  that  process  of  laborious  adaptation  to  its  environ- 
ment which  next  engages  the  attention  of  the  Church  of 
Christ. 

It  is  this  second  period  with  which  alone  the  present  work 
is  concerned,  the  period  usually  known  as  Ante-Nicene.  Its 
activities  were  spread  over  a  wide  area,  and  radiated  from 
well-marked  centres,  each  with  its  own  spiritual  character. 
It  was  conditioned  by  the  existence  alongside  of  it  of  two 
hostile  forces,  the  one  external,  the  other  internal,  the  neces- 
sity of  repelling  which  brought  out  and  consolidated  its  inner 
unity.  But  this  unity  was  always  the  free  consensus  of  in- 
dependent convictions  arrived  at  by  discussion,  and  brought 
into  relief  by  the  exigencies  of  controversy ;  it  was  rarely  or 
never  the  mechanically  imposed  unity  of  centralised  power 
enforced  by  anathemas.  Hence  the  complexity  and  indeter- 
minateness  of  the  dogmatic  system  of  this  period,  which, 
though  in  its  main  points  firmly  fixed  in  the  conscience  of 
the  Churches,  had  not  yet  found  precise  formulation  in 
authoritative  symbols.  In  this  period,  moreover,  there  is  no 
exclusive  predominance  of  any  one  Church,  so  that  local 
forms  of  thought  and  expression  find  all  the  greater  play. 

This  very  cause,  however,  adds  considerably  to  the  difficulty 
of  grasping  the  leading  features  of  the  period  as  a  whole, 
since  we  are  confronted  with  writers  from  Palestine,  Syria, 
Asia  Minor,  Greece,  Alexandria,  Carthage,  Gaul,  and  Kome, 
each  displaying  his  national  peculiarities,  not  yet  planed 
down  by  the  oppressive  weight  of  Roman  or  Byzantine  pre- 
ponderance. We  have  individuality  not  only  in  style  but  in 
thought.  We  have  differences  of  standpoint  in  principles 
little  short  of  fundamental,  and  yet  over  all  we  have  the 
broad,  unformulated,  yet  morally  coercive  unity  of  apostolic 
teaching  and  tradition.     This  unity  is  so  real  that  it  generates 


lo  INTRODUCTION. 

as  if  by  instinct  a  decided  rejection  of  the  heretical  element 
not  only  on  the  part  of  such  orthodox  writers  as  Irenseus 
and  Cyprian,  but  on  the  part  of  those  who,  like  Origen  and 
Tertullian,  were  deservedly  censured  for  the  unsoundness  of 
their  views. 

At  the  same  time,  this  very  heretical  element  which  the 
Church  rejected  demands  our  careful  consideration.  Unless 
we  understand  it,  we  shall  not  be  able  to  appraise  at  their 
true  worth  those  recent  criticisms  of  dogmatic  Christianity 
which  regard  it  as  a  compromise  between  Israel's  revelation 
and  Pagan  thought.  This  description,  so  unjust  when  applied 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  Church,  is  strictly  accurate  when  applied 
to  the  Gnostic  systems.  The  brilliant  authors  of  those  systems 
were  far  from  accepting  the  opprobrious  name  of  "heretic," 
fixed  on  them  by  the  orthodox.  They  maintained,  and  no 
doubt  with  sincerity,  that  theirs  was  the  higher,  the  purer, 
the  more  spiritual  Christianity ;  and  they  contended  that,  in 
harmonising  the  truths  revealed  by  Christ  with  the  funda- 
mental conceptions  of  philosophy,  they  were  placing  religion 
upon  its  only  sure  basis,  the  processes  of  a  purified  reason. 

It  is  evident  that  there  must  have  been  some  irreconcilable 
antagonism  of  first  principles  between  these  able  theorists 
and  thinkers  intellectually  so  closely  akin  to  them  as  Clement 
and  Origen,  in  order  to  produce  in  the  latter  their  firm  atti- 
tude of  uncompromising  resistance.  And  this  antagonism 
unquestionably  arose  from  the  relations  of  the  two  parties  to 
the  doctrines  of  Pagan  philosophy.  The  one  absorbed  the 
vital  essence  of  Christianity  into  a  vast  cosmogonical  scheme, 
into  which  it  was  made  to  fit ;  the  other  drew  out  and  ampli- 
fied the  Christian  idea  by  the  methods  of  Greek  metaphysic 
without  absorbing  or  destroying  it.  And  this  capital  dis- 
tinction cannot  be  clearly  discerned  unless  the  schemes  of 
Gnostic  Christianity  are  placed  side  by  side  with  that  of  the 
Church,  and  the  comparative  influence  of  Paganism  in  each  is 
thus  brought  out.  Our  present  object  will  not  be  to  defend 
the  orthodox  system,  or  to  pass  strictures  upon  the  heretical, 
but,  by  sketching  briefly  yet  accurately  the  views  of  both,  to 
exhibit  the  factors  in  that  complex  process  by  which  the 


INTRODUCTION.  ii 

essential  ideas  of  Christianity  were  brought  to  a  more  com- 
plete statement. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  from  an  early  period  Christian 
writers  were  indebted  to  Greek  metaphysical  science.  How  far 
back  in  Christian  history  this  indebtedness  extends  has  long 
been,  and  still  is,  matter  of  controversy.  In  the  New  Testa- 
ment there  are  two  writings  which  exhibit  an  affinity  real  or 
apparent  with  the  Grseco-Judaic  philosophy  of  the  school  of 
Philo,  the  Gospel  of  S.  John  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 
There  have  been  writers  of  mark  who  believe  that  in  both 
these  instances  the  distinctive  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Logos 
is  borrowed  from  Alexandria.  In  the  case  of  S.  John  this 
hypothesis  has  been  ably  refuted ;  and  Semitic  scholars  have 
shown  that  expressions  and  modes  of  thought  existed  within 
the  Jewish  range  which  were  capable  of  the  development 
they  assume  in  his  writings  without  being  borrowed  from 
Philo.  In  the  case  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  there  is 
no  doubt  much  more  to  be  said  in  favour  of  an  Alexandrian 
influence ;  but  even  there  the  metaphysical  aspect  is  sub- 
ordinate to  the  theological,  and  the  Epistle  can  be  adequately 
criticised  without  reference  to  Philo. 

But  so  soon  as  we  leave  the  New  Testament  and  turn  to 
the  Apologetic  literature,  we  are  face  to  face  with  a  very 
different  state  of  things.  What  before  was  at  best  dubious, 
is  now  unquestionable.  If  we  examine  the  same  Logos- 
doctrine  as  expounded  by  Justin,  Tatian,  or  Origen,  we  find 
no  vestige  of  a  Semitic  colouring.  The  conception  is  recast 
in  the  crucible  of  Greek  metaphysics,  and  evolved  in  accord- 
ance with  the  searching  dialectic  of  the  schools.  And  this  is 
done  as  a  matter  of  course,  as  the  most  natural  thing  in  the 
world.  Moreover,  the  same  process  is  repeated  with  all  the 
leading  ideas  of  the  Christian  faith. 

Take,  for  example,  the  dogma  of  Creation.  To  the  Jew 
this  was  not  conceived  of  so  much  in  the  way  of  an  explana- 
tion of  the  Universe  as  in  the  light  of  an  authoritative  dictum 
of  the  Eternal  Creator.  To  the  Greek  Christian  it  offers 
itself  both  as  a  truth  to  be  established  and  as  a  problem  to 
be  explained.     He  connects  it  by  various  lines  of  reasoning, 


12  INTRODUCTION. 

sometimes  heretical,  sometimes  orthodox,  with  the  essential 
nature  of  the  Supreme  God,  and  shows  that  it  flows  neces- 
sarily from  that  nature  when  properly  understood.  It  becomes, 
therefore,  not  only  a  supernatural  revelation,  but  an  intel- 
lectual truth. 

The  same  remark  is  true  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity, 
the  Incarnation,  original  sin,  redemption,  and  all  the  other 
mysteries  of  the  Christian  faith.  An  attempt  is  always  made 
to  connect  them  intelligibly  with  the  formal  revelation  to  the 
Church  on  the  one  hand,  and  with  the  processes  of  the  human 
intelligence  on  the  other.  The  methods  and  terminology  of 
metaphysics  are  applied  with  the  greatest  freedom,  and  carried 
into  the  very  citadel  of  Revelation ;  and  so  thoroughly  is  the 
amalgamation  between  the  two  spheres  effected,  that,  as 
Dean  Milman  has  declared  with  scarcely  an  exaggeration, 
in  the  fourth  century  of  our  era  Christianity  had  become  a 
Greek  religion.  Nor  is  there  anything  in  this  that  need  sur- 
prise us.  No  thinkers  can  transcend  the  forms  of  thought 
in  which  their  minds  have  learned  to  move.  The  Jew  could 
not;  still  less  could  the  Greek.  But  in  the  latter  case  it 
was  the  less  necessary,  since,  of  all  forms  of  thought  in  which 
the  human  mind  has  worked,  that  which  comes  nearest  to 
universality  is  that  wrought  out  in  the  laboratory  of  the 
Hellenic  mind.  Thus,  in  speaking  of  Dogmatic  Christianity 
as  a  Greek  religion,  little  more  need  be  implied  than  that 
the  great  spiritual  truths  that  came  forth  clothed  in  the 
popular  dialect  of  the  Jews  were  re-stated  in  terms  of  the 
universal  human  intelligence. 

As  the  outcome  of  this  energising  of  Greek  culture  upon 
Christian  data,  we  have  the  presentation  of  Christianity  not 
only  as  a  life  to  be  lived  but  as  a  system  of  connected  truth 
— a  complete  explanation  of  the  universe.  This  is  our  great 
debt  to  the  writers  of  this  period.  They  do  not  all  stand  on 
one  elevation ;  they  are  content  at  first  with  presenting  their 
belief  in  the  form  of  spiritual  epistles  on  the  model  of  those 
of  the  New  Testament,  or  with  issuing  forensic  pleadings  for 
the  toleration  of  their  cult.  But  they  soon  gird  themselves 
to  the  larger  task  of  determining  the  place  of  Christianity 


INTRODUCTION.  13 

among  the  competing  systems  of  the  day,  and  proving  it  to 
be  not  only  the  superior  of  them  all,  but  the  only  one  that 
is  able  to  explain  what  in  the  rest  is  false,  and  to  include  all 
that  in  them  is  true.  The  genius  of  the  writers  increases 
with  the  exigencies  of  their  task ;  the  slender  insight  into 
Greek  philosophy  possessed  by  Aristides  widens  into  the 
broad  sympathetic  touch  of  Justin,  or  the  able  but  hostile 
polemics  of  Tatian  and  the  writer  to  Diognetus.  And  this 
again  gives  place,  as  time  rolls  on,  to  the  gigantic  learning 
and  comprehensive  grasp  of  Clement,  and  the  tender  but 
discriminating  sympathy  of  the  beautiful  soul  of  Origen,  to 
be  succeeded  in  its  turn  by  the  brilliant  scorn — offspring  not 
of  ignorance  but  of  profound  knowledge — which  gleams  in 
the  pages  of  Tertullian,  and  the  large-hearted  but  super- 
ficial eclecticism  which  makes  at  once  the  strength  and 
weakness  of  Lactantius.  v 

To  this  second  period  we  owe  also  the  ennobling  practical 
conviction  that  truth  is  attested  by  suffering  for  the  truth's 
sake.  The  long  line  of  martyrs  who  died  for  their  faith, 
not  only,  as  Tertullian  declared,  sowed  by  their  blood  the 
seed  of  the  Church,  but  they  also  brought  home  to  the  minds 
of  all  unprejudiced  heathens  the  actual  living  presence  of 
that  Lord  who  enabled  His  servants  to  overcome  the  whole 
power  of  the  world,  and  to  display  before  the  turbid  and 
chaotic  fury  of  a  hopelessly  despairing  age  the  spectacle  of  a 
serene  certitude,  sure  of  its  object,  and  content  to  die  in 
realising  it.  The  lesson  thus  given  to  mankind  has  not  been,^ 
lost.  Though  we  cannot  declare  a  doctrine  to  be  true  solely 
because  men  suffer  for  it,  yet  it  has  generally  been  found 
that  those  beliefs  for  which  good  men  have  willingly  suffered 
death  have,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  been  true,  and  so  the  sacred 
union  between  divine  truth  and  human  witness  to  it  through 
the  path  of  suffering  or  contempt  has  become,  as  it  were, 
ingrained  as  an  axiom  in  the  consciousness  of  mankind. 

The  third  period,  which  it  is  beyond  the  province  of  the 
present  volume  to  discuss,  comprehends  the  great  dogmatic 
treatises  of  the  Church,  and  to  its  saints  and  theologians  we 
owe  the  vast  conception  of  a  Christian  civilisation — that  is, 


14  INTRODUCTION. 

a  reconstruction  of  the  whole  fabric  of  human  life,  within  and 
without,  upon  the  basis  of  the  Incarnation  of  Jesus  Christ, 
the  mightiest  idea  that  has  ever  been  presented  to  this  earth, 
and  which,  in  the  future  as  in  the  past,  will  surely  carry  us 
onward  to  its  distant  but  inevitable  consummation.  On  this, 
however,  we. cannot  here  enlarge. 

It  may  perhaps  be  said: — Granting  the  effect  of  the 
patristic  writings  on  the  moral  progress  of  mankind,  is  not 
their  scope  too  restricted  to  make  the  study  of  them  pro- 
fitable to  any  but  theological  students  ?  We  may  concede 
at  once  that  the  Fathers  will  never  be  popular  authors.  In 
spite  of  the  excellent  translations  that  are  available,  in  spite 
of  the  brilliant  essays  and  commentaries  on  them  by  some 
of  our  greatest  divines,  and  in  spite  of  the  real  concern  of 
most  Englishmen  with  the  subject  of  religion,  people  invari- 
ably prefer  lines  of  reading  more  akin  to  their  habitual 
modes  of  thought.  The  Fathers  have  the  mould  of  ages  on 
them.  Their  theological  dialect  suggests  remoteness  from 
ordinary  life;  the  doubts  and  controversies  they  raise,  set 
forth  in  the  terms  of  an  extinct  metaphysic,  belie  their  real 
permanence  and  seem  to  hark  back  to  a  buried  past.  The 
prolix  tone  of  the  discussions,  the  arid  polemics  which  seem 
to  lose  themselves  in  a  mist  of  wordy  disputation,  repel  the 
reader  who  is  accustomed  to  the  energetic  compression  of 
classical,  or  the  rich  freedom  of  modern  literature.  All  these 
causes  combined  lead  to  very  general  injustice  being  done 
to  the  profound  wisdom  and  intense  moral  grandeur  which 
shine  forth  in  the  literature  of  the  early  Church,  and  more 
than  atone  for  its  general  deficiency  in  beauty  of  style. 

But  although,  in  an  age  of  hurry  and  over-pressure,  it  is 
difiicult  to  find  time  for  the  study  of  original  works,  or  even 
to  so  read  between  the  lines  of  a  translation  as  to  seize  on 
the  element  of  living  thought  and  make  it  our  own,  yet  it  by 
no  means  follows  that  the  works  themselves  have  lost  their 
value,  or  that  an  account  of  them  is  not  of  general  interest. 

The  exact  contrary  is  nearer  the  truth.  At  no  time  since 
the  Eeformation  have  the  works  of  the  Fathers  assumed  a  more 
important  position  in  the  defence  of  the  Christian  religion 


INTRODUCTION.  15 

than  they  do  now.  At  no  time  has  the  value  of  their  testi- 
mony been  more  decisively  felt.  The  point  of  attack  has 
veered  round  of  late  years,  and  hostile  criticism  directs  its 
shafts  against  the  historical  authenticity  and  credibility  of 
the  evangelic  records.  The  writings  of  the  first  three  cen- 
turies have  been  subjected,  by  both  parties,  to  a  fresh  and 
most  thorough  examination,  with  the  purpose  of  establish- 
ing or  refuting  the  claims  of  the  Gospels  to  be  accounted 
authentic  history.  The  question  of  the  canon  of  the  New 
Testament  has  been  reopened,  and  the  discussion  has  turned 
on  its  attestation  by  witnesses  summoned  from  the  early  ages 
of  the  Church.  The  whole  series  of  writers,  orthodox  and 
heretical,  have  been  cross-examined,  with  results  which  have 
thrown  a  remarkable  and  unexpected  light  on  the  subject  in 
dispute.  The  Christian  believer  must  needs  be  deeply  con- 
cerned in  this  great  controversy  as  to  the  date  of  the  New 
Testament  writings.  And  although  he  may  not  feel  com- 
petent to  study  the  evidence  at  first  hand,  he  will  assuredly 
feel  a  personal  interest  in  appreciating  those  sources  of 
information,  on  whose  verdict  so  vital  an  issue  depends.  As 
has  been  said,  the  aim  of  the  present  work  is  not  theological 
or  evidential  controversy,  but  literary  criticism.  Those  who 
desire  to  satisfy  their  minds  as  to  the  genuineness  of  the 
apostolic  writings  must  read  the  works  of  those  eminent 
scholars  who  have  enriched  so  magnificently  the  theological 
treasury  of  the  English  Church.  The  object  of  this  book  is 
simply  to  review  the  succession  of  writings  which,  com- 
mencing at  the  close  of  the  first  century,  struck  out  an  ever 
wider  range,  until  it  culminated  in  the  great  philosophical 
and  theological  productions  of  the  Alexandrian  and  African 
churches. 

It  will  be  necessary,  therefore,  to  disengage  the  writers 
as  far  as  possible  from  their  connection  with  existing  con- 
troversies, and  to  point  out  how  they  became  the  torch- 
bearers  of  progress,  mental  and  moral,  through  a  night  which 
threatened  extinction  to  both.  It  will  be  useful  to  keep  in 
view  the  aspect  of  the  Church  Fathers  as  men  placed  like 
ourselves,  amid  highly  stimulating  and  anxious  surroundings, 


i6  INTRODUCTION. 

men  of  earnestness,  men  of  intelligence,  who  were  bent  on 
understanding  the  needs  of  their  time,  who  believed  that  in 
the  doctrines  which  had  brought  them  peace  they  had  found 
the  only  key  to  its  perplexities  and  its  yearnings. 

Yet,  in  truth,  if  we  abstract  ourselves  from  the  special 
forms  of  thought  then  prevalent,  and  look  steadily  at  the 
essential  nature  of  the  problems  raised  for  solution,  we 
shall  find  the  most-  striking  resemblance  between  the  Im- 
perial period  and  our  own.  Both  in  its  external  movements 
and  in  its  inner  spirit  the  era  of  the  rise  of  Christianity 
comes  nearer  to  the  nineteenth  century  than  to  any  inter- 
vening period. 

Let  us  look  first  at  the  side  of  material  civilisation.  The 
whole  world  was  under  one  system  of  law,  and  a  uniform  ad- 
ministration effaced  national  idiosyncrasies.  One  language, 
the  Greek,  was  widely  spread  if  not  universal,  and  that  no 
dead  dialect,  but  a  living  and  growing  idiom,  albeit  fallen 
from  its  first  estate. 

Then,  as  now,  the  life  of  man  was  concentrated  in  cities, 
and  the  country  districts  were  rapidly  losing  touch  with  the 
higher  thought.  Communication  between  different  parts  of 
the  world  was,  comparatively  speaking,  easy,  safe,  and  direct. 
Travel  was  less  expeditious  than  it  is  now,  but  scarcely  less 
general.  It  was  pursued  not  only  for  purposes  of  commerce, 
but  for  pleasure,  for  health,  for  the  acquisition  of  knowledge. 
The  habit  of  studying  at  foreign  universities  was,  perhaps, 
commoner  then  than  it  is  now.  Books,  no  doubt,  were 
scarce,  but  their  place  was  to  some  extent  supplied  by  the 
local  lecturer  or  the  itinerant  sophist.  Moreover,  the  uni- 
versal habit  of  open-air  life  brought  people  into  such  constant 
contact  that  information  of  any  kind  soon  became  public 
property,  and  opinion  speedily  ripened  in  the  crowded  street. 
The  popular  will  had  no  difiiculty  in  finding  a  voice;  and 
one  effect  of  it  was  the  general  tendency  to  vulgarise 
what  was  great  or]  noble.  The  standard  of  excellence  was 
diffused  but  reduced.  The  proud  and  exclusive  families 
of  the  Republic  still  survived  in  name,  but  in  reality  they 
were  almost  extinct.    The  parvenu  and  the  cosmopolite  were 


INTRODUCTION.  17 

everywhere  predominant.  The  coarse  ideals  of  wealth  and 
luxury  supplanted,  as  they  are  supplanting  now,  but  in  a  still 
grosser  manner,  the  self-discipline  of  a  sterner  age.  The 
female  sex  had  asserted  its  social  independence,  not  without 
success.  Eoman  law  was  in  several  respects  favourable  to 
women's  rights.  On  all  sides  levelling  influences  were  at 
work.  The  proletariate  of  the  world  was  rapidly  asserting 
itself  as  the  supreme  arbiter  of  desert.  All  sorts  of  competi- 
tors catered  for  its  tastes — mountebanks,  sophists,  magicians, 
philosophers,  astrologers,  theosophists ;  and  all  of  them,  to 
secure  a  favourable  hearing,  were  obliged  to  adopt  the  same 
tone,  and  that  anything  but  a  high  one.  To  court  applause 
it  was  necessary  to  play  to  the  gallery.  The  earnest  soul  of 
Aurelius  found  no  fit  audience  for  its  meditations.  He  there- 
fore addressed  them  to  himself.^ 

On  its  spiritual  side,  the  parallel  between  the  two  epochs 
is  yet  more  striking,  as  also  is  the  contrast.  In  both  the 
mental  condition  is  one  of  unrest ;  in  both  this  unrest  is  due 
to  the  same  cause,  decay  of  religious  belief,  combined  with 
an  uncontrollable  desire  to  penetrate  the  mystery  of  our 
being.  The  Pagan  creed  never  had  more  than  an  a3sthetic 
hold  over  men's  hearts,  consequently  it  was  no  hard  task  to 
undermine  it.  The  Christian  faith  is  not  surrendered  without 
a  deeper  conflict,  a  darker  sense  of  desolation.  But  if  we 
scrutinise  the  different  substitutes  now  offered  for  it,  we 
shall  detect  more  than  one  of  the  very  systems  to  which  men 
of  old  turned  in  their  search  for  lost  truth. 

At  bottom  there  are  but  three  solutions  of  the  problem  of 
the  universe.  First,  there  is  Theism,  with  its  distinguishing 
doctrines  of  free  creation,  and  moral  personality  of  God  and 
man.  It  does  not  profess  to  account  for  the  origin  of  matter, 
and  is  content  to  trace  the  existence  of  evil  to  the  determi- 
nations of  an  independent  will.  Next,  there  is  Pantheism, 
which  in  its  lowest  sense  becomes  materialism,  identifying 
the  Deity  with  the  universe  as  the  unconscious  working  of 
unvarying  law,  and  in  its  higher  sense  becomes  Spinozism,  or 
the  taking  up  of  all  apparent  contradictions  into  an  absolute 

^  They  are  entitled  tuju  eis  eavrbv  ^t^Xia. 


i8  INTRODUCTION. 

unity  which  excludes  alike  Divine  Personality  and  human 
responsibility.  Thirdly,  there  is  Dualism,  whether  undis- 
guised, as  in  the  Manichean  theory  of  two  equal  Deities  of 
diverse  nature,  or  veiled  beneath  an  abstract  unity,  which 
seeks  (but  without  success)  to  account  for  matter  by  a  pro- 
cess of  emanation  or  projection.  Of  this  the  moral  result 
is  inevitably  asceticism,  for  its  moral  theory  at  any  rate 
cannot  escape  from  the  underlying  assumption  that  matter 
is  essentially  evil. 

Those  are  terrible  moments  for  the  human  spirit,  when 
it  is  left  to  its  own  resources  to  choose  between  these  three 
positions.  When  Christianity  first  appeared  upon  the  scene, 
the  disintegration  of  belief  was  already  far  advanced.  JMany 
of  those  who  embraced  the  new  faith  had  passed  through  the 
other  solutions,  and  some  strove  earnestly  to  combine  it  with 
one  or  other  of  them,  unaware  of  their  fundamental  incom- 
patibility. 

In  the  modern  world  we  see  the  Christian  position  once 
more  placed  in  competition  with  new  forms  of  the  same 
opposing  principles.  We  see  a  widespread  desire,  nay  rather, 
an  intense  anxiety,  to  retain  the  moral  side  of  Christianity 
while  relinquishing  its  Theistic  basis.  But  the  Theosophist, 
the  Agnostic,  and  the  higher  Pantheist  will  find  their  point 
of  view  anticipated,  and  many  of  their  objections  already 
answered,  in  the  arguments  of  the  Alexandrian  Fathers. 
They  will  find  that  only  by  an  illusory  syncretism  or  fusing 
together  of  discordant  elements,  can  room  be  found  for  a 
Christian  system  of  conduct  that  does  not  spring  directly 
from  the  fountain-head  of  the  Incarnation.  They  will  thus 
be  forced  to  conclude  that  either  Christianity  is,  what  it  pro- 
fesses to  be,  a  unique  phenomenon  ;  or  else  it  must  be  ranked 
as  merely  one  among  many  religions  which,  whatever  their 
comparative  merit,  are  surveyed  from  a  neutral  standpoint 
by  the  truly  critical  eye. 

The  last  and  most  deadly  enemy  of  the  rising  Christianity 
was  Neo-Platonism,  just  because  of  its  all-comprehensive, 
all-resolving  spirit,  which  gave  it  an  apparent  universality 
while  yet  it  was  in  truth  utterly  unsubstantial.     Precisely  in 


INTRODUCTION.  19 

the  same  manner,  we  now  see  its  place  taken  by  the  Science 
of  Religions,  which,  so  long  as  it  maintains  a  strictly  scientific 
attitude,  is  of  the  highest  value ;  but  which  will  inevitably 
melt  into  nothing  if  it  assumes  to  transcend  the  scientific 
sphere  and  to  come  forward  as  a  religion  of  religions,  an  all- 
including  body  of  truth. 

In  conclusion,  we  may  affirm  that  the  reader  who 
approaches  the  study  of  the  Fathers  with  the  object  of  in- 
vestigating their  testimony  to  the  historical  character  of 
Christ's  life  on  earth,  and  the  authenticity  of  the  records 
which  embody  it,  will  find  a  rich  recompense  for  the  diffi- 
culty and  obscurity  of  his  subject;  he  will  perceive  in  the 
objections  made  against  it  by  able  heathen  opponents  an 
anticipation  of  many  of  those  with  which  we  have  of  late 
years  become  so  familiar.  As  he  reads  on,  the  obsolete 
trappings  of  antiquity  will  seem  to  drop  off,  and  the  essential 
freshness  of  the  evidence  and  its  general  applicability  to  our 
own  time  will  abundantly  appear.  And  if  his  bent  of  mind 
lead  him  rather  to  theological  than  to  historical  disquisitions, 
he  will  observe,  perhaps  with  surprise,  the  profound  learning, 
the  acute  conceptions,  and  the  power  of  spiritual  insight 
that  characterise  writings  which  he  has  been  led  to  regard  as 
mere  monuments  of  technical  skill,  with  little  bearing  on  the 
vital  questions  of  his  own  daily  life. 

It  needs  some  historical  imagination  to  reproduce  to  our 
own  minds  the  exceeding  disadvantage  at  which,  from  a 
human  point  of  view,  the  Christian  cause  was  placed,  and 
the  marvellous  energy,  surely  divine  in  its  source,  with  which 
one  obstacle  after  another  was  confronted  and  overcome. 
At  first,  by  the  patient  endurance  of  unmerited  suffering 
(the  triumphant  realisation  of  Plato's  glorious  vision  of  truth 
in  the  Gorgias),  and  afterwards  by  the  hand-to-hand  conflict 
of  argument  with  argument,  of  ideal  with  ideal,  of  thought 
with  thought ;  until  the  light  won  its  way  slowly  but  surely 
through  the  darkness  that  encompassed  it,  and  the  Cross  was 
proved  to  be  in  the  realm  of  man's  intellect  what  it  had 
already  shown  itself  in  the  realm  of  his  moral  nature,  the 
Eternal  Symbol  of  his  supreme  and  only  good. 


BOOK   I. 
THE    APOSTOLIC    FATHERS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS— GENERAL  REMARKS. 

As  has  been  stated  in  the  introduction,  there  is  a  long  gap 
between  the  close  of  the  apostolic  writings  and  the  com- 
mencement of  ecclesiastical  literature  proper.  The  interven- 
ing period  is  one  of  silent  growth,  broken  only  by  a  few 
scattered  voices.  We  could  have  wished  for  fuller  informa- 
tion, both  as  to  the  founding  of  Church  institutions  and  the 
formulating  of  Christian  doctrine.  As  it  is,  we  are  left  a 
good  deal  to  conjecture.  Nor  is  the  amount  of  knowledge 
obtainable  from  the  few  documents  that  remain  by  any 
means  equal  to  what  might  have  been  expected.  It  was 
with  Christianity  as  with  so  many  other  great  things  :  the 
period  of  its  early  growth  was  involved  in  obscurity,  and 
when  it  awoke  to  self -consciousness,  it  had  forgotten  the 
events  of  its  infancy,  or  retained  them  only  in  scattered  re- 
collections. The  vivid  light  that  encircles  its  first  preaching- 
gives  way  to  a  dim  twilight,  in  which  the  growth  that  is 
fast  proceeding  finds  but  feeble  expression  in  words. 

The  Apostolic  Fathers,  as  they  are  usually  called,  though 
sub-apostolic  would  be  a  more  correct  name,  supply  in  a  partial 
and  fragmentary  way  the  blank  in  our  sources  of  infor- 
mation. They  are  persons  occupying  as  a  rule  prominent 
positions  in  the  Christian  world,  and  their  works  are  for 
the    most   part  occasional  writings  called   foi'th  by  special 


22  THE  APOSTOLIC    FATHERS. 

circumstances.  This  is  true,  at  least,  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers 
proper.  There  are  some  other  Christian  writings  which  from 
their  antiquity  and  peculiar  character  are  classed  as  sub- 
apostolic,  but  come  more  properly  under  the  head  of  regular 
treatises  and  show  quite  a  different  tone  of  mind  and  teach- 
ing. To  the  former  class  belong  the  Epistle  of  Clement, 
with  which  we  may  rank  the  short  homily  also  ascribed  to  him  ; 
the  Epistles  of  Ignatius,  and  the  Epistle  of  Poly  carp.  These 
stand  in  a  class  by  themselves.  To  the  second  belong  the 
Epistle  of  Barnabas  so  called,  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas,  the 
Exposition  of  the  Divine  Oracles  by  Papias,  and,  last  but  not 
least,  the  anonymous  manual  of  Christian  life  known  as  the 
DidacM. 

The  dates  and  authenticity  of  nearly  all  these  writings 
have  been  hotly  disputed.  Few  of  them  have  much  definite 
attestation,  which  makes  it  all  the  more  desirable  that  the 
attainable  evidence,  such  as  it  is,  should  be  sifted  with  an 
unbiassed  mind.  Unfortunately,  in  the  case  of  two  out  of 
the  three  primary  documents,  so  many  points  of  ecclesiastical 
interest  are  involved  in  the  discussion  as  to  their  authenti- 
city that  the  argument  has  been  as  much  theological  as 
literary,  and  a  'p^^^ori  considerations  have  been  mixed  up 
with  matters  of  historical  evidence. 

The  monumental  work  of  Lightfoot  has  brought  into  pro- 
minence both  the  importance  of  these  Fathers  and  the  general 
results  of  the  critical  study  of  them.  The  constant  use  made 
in  these  pages  of  the  Bishop's  conclusions  will  be  apparent  to 
any  one  familiar  with  them,  and  need  not  be  referred  to 
again. 

General  Characteristics. — Before  commencing  a  detailed 
account  of  these  Fathers  and  their  writings,  we  propose  to 
mention  some  general  characteristics  which  differentiate  them 
from  writers  of  the  succeeding  age. 

I.  They  are  all  (except  Hermas)  closely  connected  by 
personal  association  with  the  Apostles  or  their  immediate 
followers.  And  no  stronger  indication  can  be  desired  of  the 
surpassing  spiritual  gifts  of  the  Apostles  than  the  impression 
they  made  on  those  who  had-  intercourse  with  them.     Thus 


GENERAL  REMARKS.  23 

Clement,  whose  serene  and  dignified  temper  was  far  from 
prone  to  enthusiasm,  not  only  speaks  of  them  with  the  loftiest 
praise,  but  strives  to  reproduce  their  thoughts  and  acknow- 
ledges their  binding  authority.  Ignatius,  while  encouraging 
himself  by  their  example,  nevertheless  draws  a  complete  line 
of  distinction  between  the  Apostles  and  himself.  Poly  carp 
seems  to  have  no  other  desire  than  faithfully  to  reproduce 
and  reiterate  the  treasured  sentences  of  apostolic  teaching. 
Papias  insists  in  the  strongest  terms  on  the  superior  value 
of  apostolic  tradition  to  the  voluminous  but  uncertificated 
conclusions  of  those  outside  their  circle.  The  author  of  the 
Didache,  while  providing  for  the  possible  continuance  of  the 
apostolic  ofiice  in  his  own  time,  nevertheless  rates  its  dignity 
as  highly  as  any  one,  and  speaks  of  Apostles  being  received 
as  the  Lord. 

2.  But  this  recognition  of  the  unapproachable  superiority 
of  the  Apostles  was  accompanied  by  a  formal  imitation  of 
their  writings,  which  not  only  differentiates  these  writers 
from  those  that  follow,  but  brings  into  startling  relief  the 
decline  in  spiritual  power  that  marked  the  close  of  the  first 
age.  The  sole  exception  is  Ignatius,  whose  fiery  zeal  and 
brilliant  individuality  cause  his  letters  to  stand  out  with  a 
freshness  hardly  inferior  to  those  of  the  New  Testament. 
Yet,  with  all  his  emphasis  of  expression,  he  does  not  speak 
as  one  who  is  laying  down  principles  for  the  first  time.  He 
is  a  ruler,  but  not  a  creator.  The  very  way  in  which  he 
magnifies  the  episcopal  office  almost  forbids  one  to  believe 
that  it  was  an  absolute  novelty,  though  no  doubt  sufficiently 
new  to  need  authoritative  inculcation.  The  other  writers 
present  few  thoughts  that  can  be  called  original,  though 
many  that  are  highly  valuable  for  hortatory  and  devotional 
ends.  Barnabas,  indeed,  or  whoever  wrote  his  epistle,  strikes 
out  a  vein  of  exegesis  which  he  regards  as  a  signal  proof  of 
spiritual  insight ;  but  to  the  modern  Christian  it  appears  in 
the  light  of  an  utterly  mistaken,  not  to  say  puerile,  method. 
Neither  he  nor  Clement  is  able  to  gras23  the  fundamental 
ideas  of  the  great  Apostle,  though  both  have  evidently  studied 
them,  and  Clement  at  any  rate  strives  faithfully  to  reproduce 


24  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

them.  This  will  be  sufficiently  evident  if  we  compare  the 
1 0th,  nth,  and  12th  chapters  of  Clement's  Epistle,  which 
deal  with  the  grace  of  faith,  with,  that  portion  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans  which  establishes  the  Pauline  doctrine  of 
justification.  In  the  case  of  Barnabas,  the  incompetency  to 
understand  S.  Paul  is  far  more  glaring,  and  amounts  almost 
to  contradiction.  To  S.  Paul  the  Mosaic  law,  thouo-h  done 
away  in  Christ,  was  a  genuinely  divine  stage  in  the  great 
work  of  redemptive  grace.  To  Barnabas  it  was  not  so  much 
a  concession  to  human  imperfection,  not  so  much  a  means  of 
arousing  the  sense  of  sin,  as  a  punishment  inflicted  on  the 
Jews  for  their  failure  to  apprehend  the  spiritual  character  of 
God's  primal  revelation.  This  misapprehension  of  the  rela- 
tion of  the  two  covenants  is  not  confined  to  Barnabas.  It 
reappears  with  damaging  effect  in  the  arguments  of  Justin, 
and  even  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  ;  and  in  a  different  way  it 
makes  itself  felt  in  Iren^us  and  Tertullian,  leading  the  former 
thinkers  to  underrate  the  value  of  the  legal  dispensation,  and 
the  latter  to  reimpose  it  in  a  j^urified  form  upon  the  members 
of  the  Christian  Church. 

It  seems  almost  as  if  there  was  a  spiritual  reaction  after 
the  immense  outpouring  of  the  Divine  influence  in  the  great 
creative  age.  All  at  once  the  tension  is  relaxed,  and  in  place 
of  the  glorious  principles  of  free  grace  and  love  as  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  law,  we  find  a  very  earnest  and  devout  but 
decidedly  narrowed  conception  of  the  Christian's  privileges, 
and  a  tendency  to  erect  a  new  code  of  ethical  commandments 
to  replace  the  old.  This  is  especially  noticeable  in  the  Didache 
and  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  but  is  by  no  means  wholly  absent 
from  the  higher  level  of  thought  attained  by  Clement  and 
Polycarp. 

3.  We  must  remark,  however,  that  it  is  in  their  in- 
tellectual insight  alone  that  these  truly  holy  men  display 
this  marked  inferiority.  In  the  ethical  sphere  they  are 
admirable,  and  well  deserve  the  honour  which  the  Church 
has  given  them. 

So  pure  is  the  spirit  that  animates  the  practical  exhorta- 
tions of  Clement,  Ignatius,' and  Polycarp  that  their  works 


GENERAL  REMARKS,  25 

were  treasured  by  the  faithful  as  divinely-given  helps  to 
righteousness,  and  those  of  Clement  in  especial  were  read 
publicly  in  the  Churches,  and  frequently  embodied  in  tran- 
scriptions as  supplementary  portions  of  inspired  Holy  Writ. 
The  same  honour  was  in  some  quarters  accorded  also  to  the 
writings  of  Barnabas  and  Hermas,  to  the  former  from  his 
mystical  exegesis  of  the  Old  Testament,  to  the  latter  from 
his  direct  claim  to  inspiration.  There  is  something  very 
beautiful  in  the  calm  assured  conviction  of  Clement,  in  the 
passionate  love  of  Ignatius  for  his  Saviour,  in  the  pure 
heavenly  wisdom  that  breathes  through  Polycarp's  short 
epistle  ;  and  something  very  touching  in  the  naive  simpli- 
city of  the  Didache,  with  its  literal  acceptance  of  Christ's 
precepts  and  its  absolute  unworldliness.  Never  again  in  the 
literature  of  the  early  Church  do  w^e  meet  with  writings 
which,  whatever  their  intellectual  limitations,  bear  so  fresh 
a  stamp  of  that  vision  of  unearthly  purity,  that  perfect  rest 
in  the  Father's  love,  and  that  life  which  is  hid  with  Christ 
in  God. 

Each  of  them  has  bequeathed  something  to  Christianity 
which  the  Church  could  ill  spare.  To  Clement  we  owe  the 
pervading  sense  of  the  Divine  Order,  manifested  in  the 
visible  universe,  and  not  less  truly  operative  in  the  spiritual 
world,  though  it  requires  the  eye  of  faith  to  discern  it ;  a 
great  and  fruitful  thought.  Its  influence  is  seen  in  the  stern 
repression  of  his  own  personality,  which  gives  his  words, 
delivered  as  the  utterances  of  the  Church  of  the  world's 
capital,  a  solemn  grandeur,  peculiarly  appropriate  to  the  diffi- 
cult duty  of  interposing  in  the  quarrels  of  a  sister  community. 
To  Ignatius  we  owe  the  first  impassioned  expression  of  the 
thirst  for  martyrdom,  which,  though  carried  to  excess  at 
times,  was  the  most  effective  object-lesson  of  the  supreme 
attachment  of  the  soul  to  its  Lord.  We  owe  to  him,  also, 
the  clear  perception  of  the  necessity  of  an  organised  Chris- 
tianity if  the  Church  was  to  carry  out  her  task  by  system  as 
well  as  by  zeal.  To  Polycarp  we  owe  the  example  of  a  faith- 
ful ruler  of  Christ's  flock — a  rock-like  man,  deficient  in 
originality,  unmarked  by  eloquence ;  but  all  the  more  fixed 


26  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

and  rooted  in  the  determination  to  be  the  incorruptible  guar- 
dian of  the  trust  committed  to  him — a  truly  venerable  figure, 
with  face  turned  back  towards  the  place  whence  the  echo  of 
S.  John's  voice  still  sounded  in  his  ears,  even  while  he  breasts 
the  billows  that  surge  around  his  feet.  To  the  Didache  we 
owe  the  idyllic  picture  of  a  primitive,  guileless  Christianity, 
restricted  indeed,  and  only  realisable  in  an  obscure  and 
sequestered  retreat,  but  nevertheless  inspiring  from  its  art- 
less simplicity,  and  most  instructive  from  the  unexpectedness 
of  much  that  it  reveals. 

To  the  other  three  writers  of  this  period  our  debt  is  by  no 
means  so  large.  The  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  however,  is  inte- 
resting, from  being  the  first  attempt  to  explain,  after  the 
fashion  prevalent  in  Alexandria,  the  theological  relation  of 
the  Old  and  New  Covenants,  and  also  by  the  evidence  it 
affords  in  its  latter  portion  of  the  existence  of  a  rudimentary 
Christian  catechism  or  scheme  of  duty,  of  which  the  Didache 
gives  the  earliest  example. 

The  work  of  Papias  being  unfortunately  lost,  we  are  not 
able  justly  to  estimate  its  value.  But  the  principle  with 
which  he  starts  is  one  of  great  importance.  It  consists  in  an 
emphatic  preference  for  the  testimony  of  eye-witnesses  and 
accredited  repositories  of  tradition  over  that  of  second-hand 
inference,  however  ably  drawn.  He  may  not  have  been,  and 
probably  was  not,  a  very  highly  qualified  sifter  of  evidence  ; 
but  how  applicable  his  principle  is  to  the  study  of  the  origines 
of  Christianity  is  abundantly  evident  from  the  brilliant  ima- 
ginative pictures,  with  every  quality  except  that  of  historical 
foundation,  which  have  been  so  plentifully  showered  upon  the 
reading  public  during  the  last  fifty  years. 

The  Shepherd  of  Hermas  belongs  to  a  class  by  itself. 
The  form  in  which  it  is  cast,  that  of  visions,  similitudes,  and 
commandments,  supposed  to  be  communicated  by  an  angel, 
probably  influenced  the  judgment  of  the  early  Church  unduly 
in  its  favour.  Still,  making  allowance  for  the  lack  of  culture 
of  the  writer,  and  the  narrow  circle  of  dogmatic  ideas  in 
which  his  imagination  moves,  we  are  comjDelled  to  credit  him 
with  a  deep  sincerity  of  heart,  an  overwhelming  sense  of  sin 


GENERAL  REMARKS.  27 

and  of  the  necessity  of  a  true  repentance,  together  with  a 
vein  of  strong  common  sense,  which  enabled  him  to  gauge 
with  tolerable  correctness  the  leading  spiritual  dangers  which 
beset  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  to  protest  against  them  with 
energy,  and  occasionally  with  eloquence. 


CHAPTER  11. 

CLEMENT  OF  ROME  (a.d.  97?) 

This  celebrated  Father  of  the  Church  has  corae  down  to  us 
surrounded  with  such  a  halo  of  romantic  legend,  that  it  is 
necessary,  before  stating  what  he  was,  to  determine  briefly 
what  he  was  not.  The  story  which,  in  mediseval  times,  did 
duty  for  his  biography,^  represents  him  as  a  Roman  citizen 
of  illustrious  birth,  who,  having  listened  to  the  preaching  of 
Barnabas,  either  at  Rome  or  Alexandria,  was  seized  with 
a  desire  to  visit  Palestine  and  examine  the  doctrines  of 
Christianity  at  their  source.  He  sailed  to  Csesarea,  and  was 
warmly  welcomed  by  Peter,  whose  convert  and  attached  dis- 
ciple he  became.  Their  close  friendship  suffered  no  interrup- 
tion till  Peter's  death  in  Rome,  shortly  before  which  event 
the  great  apostle  consecrated  Clement  as  his  successor  in  the 
Roman  chair.  Clement,  with  the  greatest  possible  success, 
filled  the  office  for  several  years,  winning  the  love,  not  only 
of  the  Christian  community,  but  even  of  Jews  and  heathens, 
until  the  jealousy  of  the  Prefect  caused  his  banishment  to 
the  Crimea,  where,  after  labouring  with  undiminished  zeal, 
he  suffered  martyrdom  by  being  cast  into  the  sea. 

This  story  is  unquestionably  a  pure  fiction.  It  originated 
in  Syria  among  Ebionite  sectaries,  and  the  application 
of  criticism  to  its  manifold  inconsistencies  shows  that  it 
lacks  even  the  slender  ground  of  foundation  which  such 
stories  generally  contain. 

Of  the  historical  Clement,  unfortunately,  little  is  known. 
But  the  researches  of  many  eminent  scholars  in  Germany, 
and,  more  recently,  the  exhaustive  work  of  Bishop  Lightfoot, 
enable  us  to  realise  with  considerable  probability  not  indeed 

^  See  chapter  on  "  The  Clementines." 
28 


CLEMENT   OF   ROME.  29 

his  personal  history,  but  the  surroundings  in  which  he  lived, 
the  position  he  held,  and  the  epoch  during  which  he  held  it. 

In  the  first  place,  there  is  a  very  old  and  apparently  well- 
founded  tradition  as  to  the  Episcopal  succession  of  the 
Eoman  Church.  This  tradition  is  traceable  to  Hegesippus.^ 
a  Jewish  Christian  who  visited  Eome  during  the  episcopate 
of  Anicetus  (c.  a.d.  160)  and  remained  there  till  the  accession 
of  Eleutherus  (a.d.  175).  During  the  episcopate  of  Elen- 
therus  (c.  A.D.  1 75-190)  Irenaeus  also. wrote  an  account  of 
the  Eoman  Succession.  In  both  these  lists  the  first  place 
after  the  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul  is  given  to  one  Linus, 
and  the  third  to  Clement,  the  second  being  assigned  by 
Hegesippus  to  Cletus,  and  by  Irenaeus  to  Anencletus,  who 
are  doubtless  the  same  person. 

This  order  of  succession  is  followed  by  Ensebius  and  St. 
Jerome,  by  Epiphanius  in  the  Eastern  and  Eufinus  in  the 
Western  Church.  It  is  therefore  the  traditional  order,  and 
must  be  accorded  whatever  weight  an  early  and  continuous 
tradition  deserves.  It  is,  moreover,  supported  by  the  order 
in  which  the  worthies  of  the  Eoman  Church  are  prayed  for 
in  the  Eoman  missal,  an  order  which  is  evidently  traditional, 
and  which,  if  altered,  would  certainly  have  been  altered  in 
Clement's  favour.  Furthermore,  the  only  other  list  which 
is  entitled  to  consideration  (that  of  Liberius,  who  was  Pope 
in  354),  a  list  which  can  with  great  probability  be  traced  to 
Hippolytus  of  Portus  (c.  a.d.  230),  is  shown  by  Lightfoot  to 
owe  its  divergence  from  the  first  list  to  a  blunder.^  Thus 
the  only  evidence  we  possess  is  really  consistent  with  itself, 
and,  considering  its  early  origin,  may  safely  be  accepted 
as  true.  The  duration  of  the  two  episcopates  of  Linus 
and  Anencletus   (or   Cletus)  is  given  as   twenty- four  years 

^  The  pas.-age  of  Hegesippus,  which  states  that  he  wrote  on  the  Roman 
succession,  is  quoted  by  Eusebius,  H.  E.  iv.  22.  It  is  this  list  of  his 
which  Lightfoot  shows  is  almost  certainly  the  basis  of  the  list  in  Epipha- 
nius, from  which  the  present  names  are  taken.  Epiphanius  lived  about 
A.D.  375. 

-  In  this  list  the  order  is  Linus,  Clemens,  Cletus,  Anacletus.  Lightfoot 
has  shown  that  the  transposition  of  Clemens  was  due  to  a  scribe's  error, 
and  the  duplication  of  Anencletus  to  the  same  cause. 


30  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

(probably  round  numbers),  dating  from  the  martyrdom  of 
S.  Peter,  which  may  be  placed  in  A.D.  64  or  6j.  Thus  the 
accession  of  Clement  is  brought  down  to  the  year  88  or  91  ; 
and  if  we  accept  as  the  duration  of  his  episcopate  the  term 
of  nine  years  assigned  to  it  by  all  the  lists,  we  shall  find  it 
nearly  synchronises  with  the  last  decade  of  the  first  century. 

Thus  we  have  strong  external  evidence  that  a  person 
named  Clemens  was  Bishop  or  President  of  the  Church  of 
Eome  in  the  reign  of  Domitian,  third  in  succession  from  the 
Apostles.  And  the  same  evidence  declares  this  Clement  to 
have  been  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  which 
has  come  down  to  us  under  his  name.  The  letter  itself  is 
anonymous ;  but,  in  view  of  the  strong  testimony  to  its 
genuineness,  it  is  accepted  as  Clement's  by  all  competent 
judges.  Now  the  writer  makes  distinct  mention  of  two  per- 
secutions in  Rome;  the  first,  which  took  place  "very  near 
to  the  present  day,"  and  numbered  among  its  glorious  roll 
of  athletes  "  the  two  good  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul."  ^  This 
is  evidently  the  Neronian  persecution,  in  which  the  universal 
voice  of  tradition  declares  these  apostles  to  have  suffered. 
The  second  persecution,  which  was  either  still  raging  or  just 
ceasing  to  rage  at  the  time  when  the  letter  was  written,  is 
no  less  evidently  that  under  Domitian,  which,  while  quite  as 
cruel  as  that  of  Nero,  was  carried  on,  not  by  a  single  act 
of  wholesale  outrage,  but  by  a  succession  of  insidious  attacks 
under  legal  forms.  So  long  as  this  tyrant  lived,  the  Christian 
community  could  not  feel  otherwise  than  insecure.  And 
this  sense  of  danger,  which  is  very  manifest  in  the  epistle, 
makes  it  probable  that  it  was  composed  before  the  close  of 
Domitian's  reign  (a.d.  95  or  96). 

But  here  arises  a  question  as  to  the  identity  of  the  writer. 
History  informs  us  that  Flavins  Clemens,  a  near  relative  of 
Domitian,  and  his  colleague  in  the  consulship,  was  accused, 
together  with  his  wife  Flavia  Domitilla,  on  a  charge  of 
atheism,  and  condemned.     The  husband  was  put  to  death, 

^  Lightfoot  acutely  remarks  that  this  epithet,  so  unlike  what  a  mere 
panegyrist  would  employ,  betrays  the  writer's  personal  acquaintance  with 
the  twin  founders  of  the  Roman  Church. 


CLEMENT  OF   ROME.  31 

the  wife  banished  to  an  island.  It  was  long  considered  pro- 
bable that  the  real  crime  of  Flavius  was  the  profession  of 
Christianity,  which  heathen  writers  often  confound  with 
atheism,  and  recent  antiquarian  discoveries  in  Rome  have 
made  this,  in  his  wife's  case,  certain.  We  have,  therefore, 
on  the  one  hand  a  conspicuous  historical  personage  named 
Clemens,  living  under  Domitian,  condemned  to  death  as  a 
Christian,  and  on  the  other,  an  epistle  emanating  at  the  same 
time  from  the  head  of  the  Roman  Church,  a  namesake  of  the 
consul,  but  of  whom  nothing  else  is  known.  What  wonder  if 
the  ingenuity  of  German  scholars  has  suggested  that  the  two 
are  one  ? — that  Clement  the  bishop  is  but  a  spiritual  duplicate 
of  the  undoubted  man  of  flesh  and  blood,  Clement  the  consul  ? 

Tempting  as  this  theory  is,  it  will  not  bear  a  close  inspec- 
tion. In  the  first  place,  had  Clemens  the  consul  been  also 
bishop,  it  is  incredible  that  no  tradition  of  so  remarkable  a 
fact  should  have  survived.  Moreover,  the  two  positions  at 
that  period  were,  to  a  conscientious  man,  quite  incompatible. 
And,  lastly,  the  whole  sphere  of  thought  of  the  epistle  is 
utterly  diverse  from  that  in  which  a  cultured  and  aristocratic 
Roman  must  have  moved.  The  name  Clemens  had  never 
been  uncommon,^  and  now  that  it  was  borne  by  members  of 
the  Imperial  family,  its  adoption  followed  as  a  matter  of  course 
among  the  innumerable  dependents  and  retainers  who  formed 
"  Csesar's  household." 

We  may,  therefore,  assume  that  Flavius  Clemens,  a  freed- 
man  or  dependent  of  the  palace,  probably  a  Hellenistic  Jew 
who  had  received  the  Gospel  from  one  or  other  of  the  apostolic 
founders  of  the  Roman  Church,  and  had  approved  himself 
therein  by  long  and  faithful  service,  was  in  due  time  called 
to  occupy  the  chief  place  in  the  important  and  rapidl}^  grow- 
ing Christian  community.  Whether  he  was  bishop  in  the 
modern  sense  of  the  term  has  been  doubted,  but  without 
sufficient  reason.  It  is  true  the  letter  never  mentions  his 
name,  nor  does  it  speak  of  any  bishop  as  distinct  from  the 

^  The  Clement  of  Phil.  iv.  3  was  evidently  a  Philippian  Christian.  It  is 
a  natural  but  wholly  uncritical  view  which  identifies  him  with  the  Roman 
Clement.     The  confusion  is  due  to  Origen. 


32  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

presbyters;  but  at  this  early  period,  while  one  Apostle  at 
least  still  survived,  no  hard  and  fast  line  was  drawn  between 
the  President  of  the  Presbyteral  College  and  his  inferior 
colleagues.  In  the  next  generation  the  distinction  is  already 
clearly  marked,  as  we  see  from  the  letters  of  Ignatius.  The 
language  of  these  letters  satisfies  the  strongest  champion  of 
the  Episcopal  office.  Yet  even  Ignatius  does  not  address 
the  Bishop  of  the  Eoman  Church,  but  only  the  presbyters 
and  deacons.  We  should  have  expected  the  opposite  of  this. 
The  unity  of  Imperial  administration  would  naturally  suggest 
a  corresponding  centralisation  of  Church  government.  In 
Eome,  if  anywhere,  we  should  expect  to  see  Episcopal  auto- 
cracy first  displayed.  Instead  of  this  it  appears,  if  not  of 
later  growth,  at  any  rate  in  a  less  pronounced  form  than 
elsewhere.  But,  if  the  Bishop  of  Rome  is  lost  sight  of,  the 
Church  of  Rome  already  assumes  the  role  of  leader  and  guide 
of  other  churches.  The  tone  of  Clement's  language  is  dis- 
tinctly that  of  a  superior,  offering  counsel,  exhortation,  and 
reproof.  The  Christian  Church  of  the  capital  of  the  world 
seems  to  have  acknowledged  from  the  first  a  more  than  local 
responsibility.  This  fact  gives  our  epistle  a  high  historical 
interest,  as  the  earliest  and,  as  it  were,  spontaneous  exponent 
of  this  consciousness  of  pre-eminence.  ^  In  the  next  genera- 
tion Ignatius  recognises  the  practice  of  the  Roman  Church 
as  that  of  "teaching  others,"  and  assigns  to  her  a  "presi- 
dency of  love."  About  half  a  century  later  than  Ignatius 
another  letter  was  sent  from  Rome  to  Corinth,  during  the 
episcopate  of  Soter,  and  this  also  was  inscribed  with  the 
name,  not  of  the  Bishop,  but  of  the  Church.  The  position, 
then,  of  bishop  in  the  early  Roman  Church  must  not  be  con- 
ceived of  after  the  analogy  of  the  popes  of  a  later  period ; 
it  would  be  quite  consistent  with  a  modest  estimate  of  itself, 
and  a  comparative  obscurity  of  personal  fame  ^  on  the  part 
of  its  holders. 

^  It  proceeds  in  reality  not  from  the  Bishop,  but  from  the  community. 
Dionysius  of  Corinth,  quoted  by  Eusebius  (H.  E.  iv.  23),  so  refers  to  it. 
Similarly  Ireuseus  calls  it  "  The  Epistle  of  the  Romans  to  the  Corinthians." 

-  For  example,  Linus  and  Anencletus,  who  are  mere  names  to  us. 


CLEMENT  OF  ROME.  33 

That  Clement  was  a  Jewish  and  not  a  Gentile  Christian 
is  rendered  probable  by  the  whole  cast  of  thought  in  the 
letter,  and  especially  by  the  close  familiarity  with  the  LXX. 
Version  of  the  Old  Testament  which  appears  in  every  page. 
The  argument  from  Scripture  and  from  Prophecy  is  to  him 
the  main  one,  though  that  from  reason  and  natural  law  is 
also  used  with  good  effect.  To  him  the  Scripture  is  still 
synonymous  with  the  Old  Testament,  though  he  is  familiar 
with  several  books  of  the  New,  notably  the  writings  of 
S.  Peter  and  S.  Paul. 

It  is  not  certain  whether  he  quotes  from  any  of  the  exist- 
ing Gospels.  Probably  the  sources  of  Gospel  narrative  and 
teaching  were  still  mainly  oral.  But  it  is  clear  that  no  use 
was  made  by  Clement  of  any  of  the  Apocryphal  Gospels. 
His  knowledge  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  so  intimate 
that  some  have  fancied  him  the  author,  or  at  least  the  trans- 
lator of  it.  This  conjecture  is  not  only  without  foundatior, 
but  inconsistent  with  the  style  of  the  letter,  which  is  wholly 
destitute  of  those  splendid  literary  qualities  which  mark  the 
canonical  epistle. 

The  testimony  of  Clement  is  of  exceeding  value  towards  a 
correct  determination  of  the  relation  of  the  various  lines  of 
apostolic  teaching.  As  is  well  known,  a  certain  school  of 
criticism  has  divided  the  early  Church  into  the  Petrine  and 
Pauline  parties,  the  antagonism  between  which  threatened 
to  tear  it  asunder,  and  was  with  difficulty  bridged  over  by 
such  Eirenicons  as  the  writings  of  S.  Luke  and  S.  Peter's 
first  Epistle.  Now  S.  Clement's  letter  seems  produced  ex- 
pressly to  confute  this  theory.  Not  only  is  he  unaware  of 
any  rivalry  between  the  two  great  Apostles  or  their  followers, 
not  only  does  he  couple  them  together  as  joint  founders  of 
the  Roman  Church,  and  joint  witnesses  in  their  death  for 
Christ,  but  he  has  evidently  taken  great  pains  to  assimilate 
and  harmonise  the  two  lines  of  teaching,  just  where  they 
might  have  appeared  divergent.  The  opposition  (if  such 
there  is)  between  faith  and  works  in  S.  James  has  died  out 
in  Clement ;  the  two  exist  side  by  side  as  joint  elements  in 
perfection.    Out  of  the  four  broad  streams  of  New  Testament 

C 


34  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

doctrine,  the  Petrine,  the  Jacobean,  the  Pauline,  and  the 
Johannine,  Clement  shows  a  complete  grasp  of  the  first 
three.  And  if  his  language  is  inadequate  as  an  exposition 
of  the  deeper  aspect  of  S.  Paul's  doctrine,  this  arises  from 
the  limitation  of  Clement's  mind,  not  from  any  conscious 
disagreement.  His  epistle  read  in  conjunction  with  those 
of  Ignatius  and  Polycarp  proves  that  Church  doctrine  was 
Catholic  from  the  first,  so  that  we  must  look  outside  the  main 
stream  of  development  for  those  factious  antagonisms  of 
which  so  much  has  been  made. 

The  doctrinal  system  of  Clement  is  somewhat  vague  and 
unformed.  This  defect,  it  has  been  truly  remarked,  con- 
stitutes its  highest  value.  It  gives  the  apostolic  teaching 
in  its  manifoldness,  its  fulness,  its  integrity.  It  makes  no 
attempt  to  reduce  to  system  what  the  Apostles  themselves 
have  not  reduced.  It  is  a  faithful  mirror  of  the  current 
teaching  of  the  early  Church.  It  agrees  with  Ignatius,  with 
Polycarp,  and  with  the  DidaM,  in  preserving  an  unmodified 
corpus  of  doctrine,  on  which  the  subtleties  of  Greek  intellect 
and  the  forensic  acuteness  of  Roman  culture  had  not  yet 
begun  to  play. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  receives  the  same  sort  of  un- 
defined expression  as  in  the  New  Testament ;  yet  it  is  un- 
mistakably assumed  as  the  basis  of  faith.  The  mediatorial 
and  High-priestly  work  of  Christ  is  also  fully  grasped,  and, 
so  far  as  we  can  judge.  His  pre-existence  also.  In  one 
passage,^  indeed,  Clement  goes  beyond  the  scriptural  point 
of  view,  and,  if  the  reading  be  correct,  gives  some  gi'ound 
for  being  credited  with  Patripassian  leanings  ;  but  new  MS. 
evidence  makes  it  probable  that  the  expression  "His  suffer- 
ings "  should  be  referred  to  Christ  and  not  to  God. 

Some  exception  has  been  taken  to  the  introduction  of  the 
Phoenix  legend  as  a  type  or  proof  of  the  Resurrection  on 
the  ground  of  its  fabulous  character.  But  to  this  it  is 
sufficient  to  reply  that  men  of  greater  intellect  and  learning  ^ 
than  Clement  believed  it,  and  it  in  no  way  interferes  with  the 

^  Chap.  ii.  init.  rd  TradTjixara  avroO  (sc.  deov). 
2  Such  as,  for  example,  Tacitus. 


CLEMENT  OF  ROME.  35 

spiritual  authority  of  the  writer's  argument.  Clement's  mind 
was  receptive,  not  creative  ;  and  this  fact  really  enhances  the 
value  of  his  just  and  comprehensive  statement  of  the  main 
articles  of  the  Christian  faith. 


Characteristics  of  his  Mind  and  Genius. 

We  must  not  look  to  this  Father  for  the  elucidation  of  any 
particular  doctrine,  but  rather  for  a  general  comprehensive 
survey  of  the  Christian  system.  His  is  emphatically  an  ''  all- 
round  "  mind.  He  is  not  fascinated  by  particular  aspects  of 
truth,  nor  led  by  the  claims  of  one  to  deny  their  due  to 
others.  Such  a  temper  was  needed  by  the  time.  The  Church 
of  Eome,  so  far  back  as  the  date  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Philip- 
pians,  contained  the  two  discordant  elements  of  Jew  and 
Gentile  Christians,  and  the  misunderstandings  between  them 
had  probably  been  accentuated  rather  than  diminished  after 
the  Apostle's  death.  A  ruler  at  once  firm  and  conciliatory, 
who  could  hold  the  balance  with  impartial  sympathy,  was 
imperatively  required.  Such  a  one,  we  can  easily  believe, 
was  found  in  Clement. 

Of  a  calm,  stately  character,  naturally  fitted  for  command, 
he  may  have  had  special  opportunities  for  studying  the 
machinery  of  organisation  and  government  as  a  dependant 
of  the  consul,  possibly  admitted  to  his  intimate  thoughts. 
It  would  almost  seem  that  some  unusual  advantage  of  this 
kind  had  been  enjoyed  by  him.  His  Jewish  descent  in 
itself  would  be  no  recommendation  to  office ;  but,  if  we 
suppose  the  interest  of  the  consul  to  have  been  exerted  in 
his  favour,  this  high  testimony  may  have  counteracted  a 
natural  prejudice.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  choice 
was  a  singularly  happy  one.  The  Church  of  Kome  never 
had  any  aptitude  towards  theological  speculation ;  but  she 
was  inevitably  destined  to  take  the  leading  ^^osition  in  the 
development  of  ecclesiastical  policy.  And  to  Clement  be- 
longs the  merit  or  good  fortune  of  possessing  exactly  the 
character  that  was  necessary  to  be  impressed  upon  the  church 
he  represented.     Consciously  or  unconsciously,  acting  under 


36  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

a  strong  sense  of  duty,  he  vindicated  for  the  Church  of  the 
Metropolis  at  the  outset  those  mediating  and  regulating  pre- 
rogatives, which  led  on  step  by  step  to  the  towering  edifice  of 
Papal  dominion.  His  letter,  so  calm,  so  equitable,  so  strictly 
impersonal,  and  yet  so  instinct  with  moral  authority,  recalls 
the  qualities  of  those  ancient  Roman  worthies,  who,  without 
any  striking  individual  genius,  built  up  with  strangely  har- 
monious sagacity  the  power  of  the  conquering  Republic. 
The  halo  of  legendary  heroism  that  gathered  round  his  name 
was  the  tribute  of  a  penetrating  instinct  on  the  part  of  a 
later  age. 

There  is  no  evidence  that  the  Epistle  was  ever  trans- 
lated into  Latin.  Consequently,  after  the  beginning  of  the 
third  century,  when  Greek  ceased  to  be  the  spoken  language 
of  the  Roman  Christians,  it  seems  to  have  dropped  out  of 
sight,  and  its  place  to  have  been  supplied  by  spurious 
documents,  which  will  be  referred  to  in  the  next  chap- 
ter. In  several  churches  of  eastern  Christendom,  how- 
ever, it  was  highly  valued,  and,  as  we  know  from  Eusebius, 
read  in  the  public  services,  together  with  the  so-called 
Second  Epistle. 

Authorities  for  the  Text. 

Until  the  year  1875  the  sole  authority  was  the  celebrated 
Alexandrian  MS.,  which  contains  the  whole  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  and  appends  the  two  epistles  of  Clement 
after  the  Apocalypse.  The  last  part  of  the  first  epistle  and 
the  latter  half  of  the  second  were  wanting.  In  1875  a  volume 
was  published  at  Constantinople,  bearing  the  title,  "  The  two 
Epistles  of  our  Holy  Father,  Clement,  Bishop  of  Rome,  to 
the  Corinthians ;  from  a  MS.  in  the  library  of  the  Most  Holy 
Sepulchre  in  Fanar  of  Constantinople ;  now  for  the  first  time 
published  complete,  with  prolegomena  and  notes  by  Philo- 
theus  Bryennios,  Metropolitan  of  Serrae."  This  MS.,  which 
is  known  as  the  Constantinopolitan,  has  yielded  results  of 
the  highest  value  to  Christian  theology;  for,  besides  the 
Epistles  of  Clement,  it  contains  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas, 


CLEMENT  OF  ROME.  37 

the  Epistle  of  Mary  of  Cassobola  to  Ignatius,  and  twelve 
Ignatian  Epistles,  besides  a  previously  unknown  and  most 
precious  relic  of  the  first  age,  "  The  Teaching  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles."  Shortly  after  this  discovery,  a  second  authority 
for  the  complete  text  of  Clement  was  announced  to  the 
world.  This  was  a  Syriac  translation  of  the  Scriptures  of 
the  New  Testament  in  the  following  order : — 

1 .  The  Four  Gospels,  followed  by  a  history  of  the  Passion, 
compiled  from  the  four  Evangelists. 

2.  The  Acts  and  Catholic  Epistles,  followed  by  the  Epistles 
of  S.  Clement  to  the  Corinthians. 

3.  The  Epistles  of  S.  Paul,  including  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  which  stands  last. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  volume  are  three  tables  of  lessons, 
one  for  each  of  tliese  three  divisions. 

The  First  Epistle  of  Clement  is  thus  headed,  ''  The 
Catholic  Epistle  of  Clement  the  Disciple  of  Peter  the 
Apostle  to  the  Church  of  the  Corinthians,"  and  similarly 
the  second  is  entitled,  "  Of  the  same  the  Second  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians."  The  date  of  this  translation  is  uncertain, 
but  Lightfoot  thinks  it  contains  two  elements,  one  very 
ancient  and  good,  the  other  debased  and  probably  recent. 

These  three  authorities  are  independent  of  one  another,  and 
between  them  enable  us  to  fix  the  text  of  the  epistle  with 
the  greatest  accuracy.  The  archetype  from  which  all  were 
derived,  though  early,  cannot  be  placed  further  back  than 
the  close  of  the  second  century ;  for  when  it  was  written,  the 
so-called  Second  Epistle,  if  not  actually  ascribed  to  Clement, 
was  already  annexed  to  his ;  and  it  is  quite  certain  that  this 
writing  is  considerably  posterior  to  the  time  of  Clement. 

The  introduction  of  the  two  epistles  into  the  calendar  of 
lessons  is  a  testimony  to  their  canonical  estimation  in  the 
particular  Syrian  church,  perhaps  that  of  Edessa,  from  which 
the  MS.  emanated.  But  there  is  no  evidence  that  any  other 
church  placed  them  on  the  full  level  of  inspired  Scripture,  far 
less  that  the  Greek  Church  as  a  whole  did  so. 

We  conclude  the  chapter  with  two  extracts,  to  give  the 
reader  an  impression  of  the  writer's  style.     The  first  is  where 


208578 


38  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

he  dwells  on  the  orderliness  of  the  visible  universe  as  an 
exhortation  to  man  not  to  interrupt  the  Divine  harmony  of 
creation :  ^ — 

"  The  heavens  swaying  peacefully  under  His  direction  are  sub- 
ject unto  Him.  Day  and  night  fulfil  under  Him  their  ordered 
course,  in  no  wise  hindering  one  another.  Sun  and  moon,  and 
starry  choir,  in  accordance  with  His  command,  roll  harmoniously 
along  their  fixed  orbits  without  any  deviation.  The  earth  bring- 
ing to  birth  at  the  proper  seasons,  according  to  His  will,  its  full 
tale  of  nourishment  for  man  and  beast  and  all  the  creatures  that 
inhabit  it,  puts  it  forth,  making  no  dissension,  nor  altering  aught 
of  that  which  He  has  assigned  to  it.  The  trackless  regions  of  the 
abyss  and  the  unexplored  limits  of  the  nether  world  are  bound 
together  under  the  same  ordinances.  The  basin  of  the  boundless 
sea,  by  His  creative  power  gathered  into  its  compartments,  does 
not  overstep  the  barriers  which  encircle  it,  but  acts  in  accordance 
with  His  commands.  For  He  has  said,  '  Thus  far  shalt  thou  come 
and  no  further,  and  thy  waves  shall  be  broken  within  thee.'  The 
ocean,  impassable  by  man,  and  the  worlds  that  lie  beyond  it,  are 
administered  by  the  same  direction  of  their  Master.  The  seasons 
of  spring  and  summer,  autumn  and  winter,  give  way  in  peaceful 
succession  to  each  other.  The  fixed  quarters  of  the  winds  in 
their  proper  season  fulfil  their  service  without  disturbance.  The 
perennial  streams,  formed  for  enjoyment  and  health,  without  fail 
supply  the  breasts  that  give  life  to  man.  The  smallest  creatures 
fulfil  their  unions  in  peace  and  concord.  All  these  things  the 
great  Creator  and  Master  of  all  has  commanded  to  be  in  peace 
and  harmony,  doing  good  to  all  things,  and  more  exceedingly  to 
us  who  have  taken  refuge  in  His  tender  mercies  through  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord,  to  whom  be  glory  and  greatness  for  ever  and 
ever.     Amen." 

In  the  following  passage  he  seems  to  be  competing  with 
his  great  predecessor  S.  Paul  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Corinthian 
Christians :  - — 

"  Seeing,  then,  that  many  gates  are  open,  that  of  righteousness 
is  Christ's  gate,  by  which  blessed  are   all  they  that  enter  and 

^  Chap.  XX.  The  reader  will  be  reminded  of  the  beautiful  lines  of 
Keble  for  Septuagesima  Sunday,  "  There  is  a  book,  who  runs  may  read," 
Szc.  -  Chaps.  xlviii.-I. 


CLEMENT  OF   ROME.  39 

direct  their  way  in  holiness  and  righteousness,  accomplishing  all 
things  without  tumult.  Let  a  man  be  faithful,  let  him  be  mighty 
in  expounding  knowledge,  wise  in  the  discernment  of  reasonings ; 
let  him  be  strenuous  in  action,  let  him  be  chaste.  All  the  more 
necessary  is  it  for  him  to  be  humble-minded  the  greater  he  seems, 
and  to  seek  the  common  good  and  not  his  own.  He  that  hath 
love  in  Christ,  let  him  keep  the  commandments  of  Christ.  Who 
can  describe  the  binding  power  of  the  love  of  God  ?  Who  is  suf- 
ficient to  express  the  splendour  of  its  beauty  ?  The  height  to 
which  love  raises  us  is  indescribable.  Love  joins  us  to  God. 
Love  hides  a  multitude  of  sins.  Love  bears  all  things,  puts  up 
with  all  things.  There  is  no  self-assertion  in  love,  no  pride ;  love 
knows  naught  of  schism ;  love  fosters  not  a  factious  temper ; 
love  does  all  in  harmony.  In  love  were  all  God's  elect  made  per- 
fect ;  without  love  nothing  is  pleasing  to  God  ;  in  love  the  Lord 
has  taken  us  for  His  own.  Through  the  love  which  He  had 
towards  us  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  the  will  of  God,  gave  His 
blood  for  us,  His  flesh  for  our  flesh,  and  His  life  for  our  life. 
You  see,  beloved,  how  great  and  marvellous  a  thing  love  is ;  indeed, 
there  is  no  describing  its  perfection.  Who  is  fit  to  be  found 
therein,  save  those  whom  God  deems  worthy  ?  Let  us  then  seek 
and  implore  His  mercy,  that  we  may  live  in  love,  free  from  human 
factiousness.  All  the  generations  up  to  this  day  have  passed, 
but  they  who  were  made  perfect  in  love  according  to  God's  grace 
have  the  place  assigned  to  the  pious,  and  shall  be  made  manifest 
in  the  visitation  of  Christ's  kingdom." 


CHAPTEE  III. 

THE  PSEUDO-CLEMENT. 

As  mentioned  in  the  last  chapter,  the  Alexandrian  MS., 
written  in  the  fifth  century,  contains  two  "  Epistles  of  Cle- 
ment," apparently  both  supposed  to  be  addressed  to  the  Corin- 
thians, i  The  Constantinopolitan  MS.  of  Bryennios  intitules 
both  writings  as  Clement's  and  to  the  Corinthians,  but  not 
as  epistles.  The  Syriac  version  heads  the  second  thus,  "  Of 
the  same  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians." 

At  the  earlier  date  at  which  Eusebius  wrote,  this  full 
recognition  had  not  yet  been  obtained.  His  words  are,^  "  I 
should  mention  also  that  there  is  said  to  be  a  second  epistle 
of  Clement ;  but  we  do  not  know  that  this  is  recognised  like 
the  former ;  for  we  do  not  find  the  older  writers  making  any 
use  of  it."  Rufinus  and  Jerome  follow  the  lead  of  Eusebius, 
but  with  greater  emphasis,  as  is  the  manner  of  followers. 

The  work  had,  until  the  year  1 875,  existed  only  in  a 
mutilated  state ;  but  already  more  than  one  editor  had  sus- 
pected that  it  was  no  epistle,  but  a  homily  or  sermon ;  and 
the  discovery  of  the  lost  portion  in  that  year  made  this 
suspicion  a  certainty.  It  cannot  be  said  to  redound  to  the 
credit  of  ancient  Church  criticism  that  an  epistolary  character 
was  first  assigned  to  the  work,  and  then  per[3etuated  by  a 
continuous  tradition,  without  any  apparent  misgiving. 

Whoever  the  composer  may  have  been,  he  wrote  at  Corinth. 
This  is  the  one  correct  element  in  the  old  title.  It  has  indeed 
been  argued  ^  that  Rome  was  the  place  of  composition  ;  but 
the  allusions  to  the  games  *  seem  to  require  a  writer  on  the 

^  It  is  true  that  the  second  epistle  has  no  heading  :  but  Lightfoot  thinks 
this  is  probably  due  to  mutilation,  though  it  might  also  arise  from  tran- 
scription from  an  earlier  copy,  which  did  not  claim  to  be  by  Clement. 

"  By  Harnack.  ^  In  §  7. 

40 


THE  PSEUDO-CLEMENT.  41 

spot  to  give  them  point.  Moreover,  it  is  hard  to  see  why 
the  document  should  have  been  connected  from  the  first  with 
Corinth,  if  there  were  no  reason  whatever  for  it.  The  Corin- 
thian Church  is  known  to  have  cherished  the  custom  of  read- 
ing occasionally,  in  public  worship,  compositions  by  pious 
men  outside  the  canonical  writings,  as  Clement's  epistle,  and, 
at  a  later  date,  that  of  Soter.  This  homily,  if  the  work  of  a 
resident  saint,  may  have  gained  the  honour  of  such  occasional 
reading,  and  so  have  come  to  be  ranked  with  the  genuine 
Epistle  of  Clement. 

Who  the  writer  was,  we  cannot  even  conjecture.  Bryen- 
nios  still  thinks  he  may  have  been  Clement  of  Eome ;  but, 
not  to  mention  other  arguments,  Clement  is  evidently  a 
Jewish  Christian,  and  this  writer  as  evidently  a  Gentile.^ 
Hilgenfeld  identifies  him  with  Clement  of  Alexandria,  but 
considerations  of  tone  and  style  make  this  altogether  incred- 
ible. Harnack  fancies  he  may  be  the  Clement  alluded  to  by 
Hermas,^  who  was  to  distribute  the  Pastor  to  foreign  cities. 
But  this  shadowy  individual  is  almost  certainly  Clement  of 
Eome,  introduced  by  a  slight  anachronism,  if  we  suppose  the 
ordinarily  accepted  date  of  Hermas  ^  to  be  correct. 

The  date  of  our  homily  is  uncertain,  but  unquestionably 
it  belongs  to  a  very  early  period.  The  attitude  assumed 
towards  the  Gnostic  denial  of  the  resurrection,*  and  the 
Platonising  account  of  the  earthly  and  heavenly  churches,^ 
are  both  characteristic  of  the  time  before  Valentinus.^ 
Again,  the  free  use  of  the  Gospel  according  to  the  Egyptians 
as  Scripture,  if  the  writer  belonged  to  the  Catholic  Church, 
would  only  be  compatible  with  a  primitive  date.  It  seems 
clear  that  he  was  acquainted  with  some  at  least  of  S.  Paul's 
writings,  and  perhaps  of  S.  John's.  The  topics  dealt  with 
are  primitive,  though  later  than  the  apostolic  period.  Any 
time  between  a.d.  100  and  140  would  suit  the  indications  we 

1  Cf.  §§  I  and  2.  2  yjg^  ij_  4^  3  ^-Q   140-155. 

^  §§  8,  9,  14,  16.  ■>  §  14. 

*>  This  heretic  imagined  an  aeon  called  Ecclesia,  who  was  united  to  the 
Fiiot-born.  Had  this  doctrine  been  known  to  the  Corinthian  writer,  he 
would  probably  have  been  more  careful  in  his  language. 


42  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

possess,  with  a  tendency  toward  the  earlier  limit  of  the 
scale. 

A  few  words  may  be  given  to  the  character  and  contents 
of  the  writing.  The  interest  of  these  is  historic,  not  intrinsic, 
for  the  sermon  is  as  dry  and  commonplace  as  any  of  those  of 
to-day  ;  but  the  light  that  it  throws  on  an  obscure  period  of 
Church  history  and  on  the  development  of  doctrine,  is  not 
without  value.  We  see  a  high,  though  not  strictly  orthodox 
Christology,  a  clear  grasp  of  the  connection  between  the 
two  covenants,  a  witness  to  the  vast  extension  of  Gentile 
Christianity,  and  an  appreciation  of  the  dangers  of  a  one- 
sided and  impatient  gnosis. 

But  by  far  the  most  interesting  point  in  the  composition 
is  the  relation  of  the  writer  to  the  canon.  In  this  he  shows 
his  posteriority  to  the  true  Clement.  To  the  latter  the 
Scripture  means  the  Old  Testament,  to  the  former  it  in- 
cludes also  the  New ;  and  not  only  this,  but  apparently  an 
apocryphal  gospel  (that  according  to  the  Egyptians),  which 
is  quoted  several  times  without  suspicion  as  if  it  were  genuine. 
From  this  comes  the  supposed  saying  of  Christ,  that  His 
kingdom  should  come  "  when  the  two  are  one,  and  the  inside 
as  the  outside,  and  the  male  with  the  female,  neither  male 
nor  female."  The  words  themselves  have  a  spurious  ring, 
and  the  Encratite  intei^pretation  put  on  them  by  the  homilist 
reveals  a  doubtful  element  in  his  orthodoxy. 

The  New  Testament  quotations  and  allusions  are  more 
numerous  than  the  Old,  a  clear  proof  of  Gentile  origin. 
They  are  chiefly  from  the  Gospels,  but  some  are  from 
S.  Paul's  Epistles.  They  are  loose  and  often  inaccurate, 
and  their  application  lacks  precision.  The  argument  of  the 
sermon  is  weak,  and  wearisome  to  the  reader,  and  the  mental 
power  displayed  very  slight ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  there 
is  a  fine  moral  earnestness,  and  every  mark  of  a  genuine 
faith.  In  fact,  the  stamp  of  Clement's  name  served  as  a 
guarantee  of  the,  author's  fidelity  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
Catholic  Church.     He  must  have  been  a  presbyter, ^  for  he 

^  §§  I7»  19)  where  some  details  of  Christian  worship  are  given.  "After 
the  God  of  truth  "  in  §  19,  means  "  After  the  reading  of  Scripture."  This 
may  be  compared  with  Justin's  well-known  account  in  Apol.  i.  67. 


THE  PSEUDO-CLEMENT.  43 

evidently  refers  to  himself  as  the  deliverer  of  the  sermon, 
and  may  have  been  the  bishop  for  aught  that  appears  to  the 
contrary.  The  idea  that  he  was  a  lay-preacher  is  far  less 
likely,  because,  although  laymen  of  well-known  piety  or 
learning  were  occasionally  allowed  to  preach,  as  we  know 
was  the  case  with  Origen,  yet  this  indulgence  was  so  rare 
that  it  should  not  be  called  in  to  explain  what  can  be  ex- 
plained without  it. 

Other  Writing's  ascribed  to  Clement. 

The  two  Epistles  on  Virginity,  extant  only  in  the  Syriac, 
were  brought  to  Europe  from  Aleppo  in  the  last  century, 
and  first  published  in  1752.  They  were  then  maintained  to 
be  genuine,  and  the  position  has  been  ably  defended  more 
than  once  since.  But  the  frequency  of  quotations  from  the 
New  Testament,  and  the  picture  presented  of  the  life  of  the 
Church,  do  not  agree  with  the  genuine  epistle,  and  point  to 
a  later  age.  They  are,  however,  very  ancient,  and  Westcott 
thinks  they  cannot  be  placed  much  later  than  150  a.d. 

The  first  writer  who  refers  to  them  is  Epiphanius.  This 
Father  was  well  acquainted  with  Palestine  and  Syria,  the 
region  where  they  originated.  He  speaks  of  "  the  encyclical 
letters  which  Clement  wrote,  and  which  are  read  in  the  holy 
churches;  ...  he  himself  teaches  virginity;  he  praises 
Elias  and  David  and  Samson,  and  all  the  prophets."  This 
description  applies  very  accurately  to  the  Epistles  to  Virgins, 
and  not  at  all  to  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  which  indeed 
Epiphanius  had  probably  never  seen.  S.  Jerome  also  shows 
a  knowledge  of  these  two  letters,  though  he  only  once  refers 
to  them  by  name ;  and  one  of  them  is  also  quoted  by  Timo- 
theus  of  Alexandria  (a.d.  457).  The  western  churches  seem, 
however,  to  know  nothing  of  them.  What  Epiphanius  says 
as  to  their  being  everywhere  read  may  either  be  an  exaggera- 
tion founded  on  their  use  in  a  few  Syrian  congregations,  or 
it  may  be  a  confusion  with  the  honour  accorded  to  the  true 
Clement. 

The  existing  Syriac  text  is  obviously  a  translation  from 


44  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

a  Greek  original,  which  we  may  hope  will  some  day  come 
to  light. 

Besides  this  pair  of  epistles,  yet  another  pair  may  be 
noticed,  viz.,  those  inscribed  to  James,  the  Lord's  Brother. 
The  first  of  these,  which  will  be  referred  to  in  the  chapter 
on  the  Clementines,  dates  probably  from  A.D.  150-200.  In 
the  original  Greek  MSS.  it  is  prefixed  to  the  Clementine 
homilies.  About  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  it  was 
translated  into  Latin  by  Rufinus.  It  gives  an  account  of 
S.  Clement's  appointment  as  successor  to  8.  Peter,  and  the 
Apostle's  directions  as  to  the  general  administration  of  the 
Church.  This  letter  was  incorporated  several  centuries  later 
into  the  false  Isidorian  Decretals,  but  not  without  consider- 
able additions.  A  second  letter  to  James,  extant  only  in  the 
Latin  and  subsequent  to  Rufinus,  ranks  as  second  in  the 
series  of  decretals,  but  is  also  much  interpolated.  In  the 
Latin  Church  these  were  generally  known  as  "  The  Letters 
of  Clement."  Hence,  as  Lightfoot  truly  says,  the  letters  of 
Clement  would  have  a  different  meaning  for  each  of  the 
three  branches  of  the  Church.  To  the  Greek  it  w^ould  mean 
''  The  Epistle  and  Homily  to  the  Corinthians  ;  "  to  the  Latin 
it  would  mean  "  The  two  Epistles  to  James ;  "  and  to  the 
Syrian  it  would  mean  "  The  two  Epistles  on  Virginity."  We 
have  shown  that  of  this  imposing  list  one,  and  one  only,  is  to 
be  accepted  as  genuine. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  EPISTLE  OF  BARNABAS. 

The  curious  epistle  or  treatise  which  bears  the  name  of 
Barnabas  must  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  most  important 
documents  of  the  sub-apostolic  age.  Its  title,  unlike  Clement's, 
has  been  hotly  disputed.  Gebhardt  and  Harnack,  the  most 
recent  editors,  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  none  but  a  i^rejudiced 
critic  can  believe  it  to  be  genuine.  The  learned  author  of 
the  article  in  Smith's  Biographical  Dictionary  as  evidently 
leans  to  its  genuineness.  Unfortunately,  the  scarcity  of 
materials  for  scientific  argument  must  leave  the  answer  to 
the  question  a  matter  of  opinion.  Where  so  much  depends 
on  a  delicate  critical  sense  and  acuteness  in  following  up 
obscure  allusions,  and  so  little  on  clear  external  proof,  a 
probable  conclusion  is  the  utmost  that  can  be  ex^oected.  We 
may  regret  this  the  more,  because  the  high  authority  of 
Barnabas,  and  his  deeply  interesting  personality  as  revealed 
in  the  New  Testament,  would  have  made  us  hold  as  a  most 
precious  possession  any  undoubted  product  of  his  mind. 
Following  our  usual  method  in  similar  cases,  we  shall  give 
a  brief  summary  of  the  external  and  internal  evidence, 
noting  only  the  more  striking  points,  and  leaving  the 
minuticD  to  those  who  are  jDrepared  to  give  the  question  a 
thorough  study. 

The  author  of  the  article  referred  to  says,  "It  is  admitted 
on  all  sides  that  the  external  evidence  is  decidedly  in  favour 
of  the  idea  that  the  epistle  is  authentic."  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria bears  witness  to  it  on  more  than  one  occasion  as  the 
work  of  Barnabas  the  Apostle.^     He  is  followed  by  Origen, 

^  Harnack  cites  nine  passages  of  Clement  containing-  quotations  of  this 
epistle,  some  of  which  he  has  misunderstood  (Prolegom.  p.  xlvii.) 


46  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

who,  in  his  first  book  against  Celsus,i  quotes  from  the 
"  Catholic  Epistle  of  Barnabas "  as  if  it  were  Scripture. 
The  famous  Codeo:  Sinaiticus,  written  in  the  fourth  century, 
includes  it  among  the  books  of  Scripture,  but,  by  placing  it 
after  the  Apocalypse  of  John  though  before  that  of  Peter 
and  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas,  implies  that  its  authority  is 
deutero-canonical,  or  inferior  to  that  of  the  universally 
accepted  books.  Thus  far  the  testimony  in  its  favour  is 
limited  to  the  Alexandrian  Church,  to  which  the  Codex 
Sinaiticus  may  ultimately  be  traced.  But  a  wider  recogni- 
tion awaited  it,  though  on  a  somewhat  lower  level.  Eusebius 
mentions  the  epistle  in  two  places.^  In  one  he  ranks  it 
amono-  the  '"'  spurious,"  in  the  other  among  the  "disputed  " 
books. 

In  the  first  passage  he  speaks  of  it  as  the  currently  re- 
ceived Epistle  of  Barnabas,^  in  the  second  simply  as  the 
Epistle  of  Barnabas.  While,  therefore,  he  expresses  himself 
unfavourably  as  regards  its  canonicity,  he  appears  to  accept 
without  question  its  authenticity.  The  testimony  of  Jerome 
is  also  important.  In  two  places  ^  he  mentions  it  as  classed 
among  "the  Apocryphal  Scriptures,"  which  phrase  must  be 
understood  not  as  implying  a  want  of  authenticity,^  but  as 
denoting  its  rejection  from  the  canon  of  inspired  and  univer- 
sally received  Scripture. 

If  it  be  asked.  How  could  Eusebius  and  Jerome  believe 
the  epistle  to  be  the  work  of  the  Apostle  Barnabas,  and  yet 
relegate  it  to  the  position  of  an  apocryphal  work  ?  the  answer 
may  be  given  that  Barnabas,  in  sej^arating  himself  from  the 
Apostle  Paul,  had  necessarily  impaired  that  complete  fellow- 
ship of  apostolic  doctrine  which  his  association  with  S.  Paul 
would  otherwise  have  secured.^  Nevertheless,  the  fact  that 
as  late  as  the  close  of  the  fifth  century  a  place  among  the 

^  Chap.  Ixiii.  -  Book  iii.  25,  4.     Book  \i.  13,  6. 

■^  i]  (pepofievT]  Bapvd^a  einaTo\y}.  This  has  been  interpreted  as  equivalent 
to  7/  Xeyo/xevT),  "  the 'so-called  Epistle,"  but  without  good  reason. 

*  De  Vir.  Illustr.  6,  and  in  Comm.  ad  Ezech,  xliii.  19. 

^  \pevheirl-ypa(pov.  It  is  true  that  Jerome  sometimes  uses  the  word 
"  apocryphus  "  in  this  sense,  but  that  is  not  his  usual  way. 

*  Acts  XV.  40. 


THE  EPISTLE  OF  BARNABAS.  47 

canonical  books  is  still  claimed  for  the  epistle,  proves  the 
high  estimation  in  which  it  was  held,  the  origin  of  which  is 
hard  to  explain  on  any  other  supposition  than  that  it  had 
always  been  associated  with  the  name  of  the  great  apostolic 
teacher. 

On  the  other  side,  several  arguments  have  been  advanced, 
all  based  upon  internal  evidence.  The  most  important  are 
those  adduced  by  Hefele,  of  which  the  following  are  the 
chief: — (i.)  That  the  intellectual  level  of  the  work  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  attainments  of  Barnabas,  the  argument 
being  founded  upon  ingenious  but  trifling  allegories,  and  not 
upon  a  broad  spiritual  grasp  of  the  Old  Testament.  This  is 
one  of  those  a  priori  arguments  that  it  is  always  hard  to 
refute.  No  doubt,  to  the  modern  reader,  armed  with  the 
rational  methods  of  scientific  criticism,  many  of  the  analogies 
insisted  upon  in  the  epistle  are  not  merely  unconvincing  but 
ridiculous ;  but  in  an  age  which  delighted  in  mystic  exposi- 
tion, and  found  latent  spiritualities  in  the  barest  numerical 
statistics,  these  same  applications  may  have  seemed  instances 
of  profound  wisdom ;  and  in  any  case,  they  affect  rather  the 
scaffolding  of  his  argument  than  the  edifice  itself,  for  there 
is  no  want  of  real  insight  into  the  great  truths  of  Christianity, 
and  especially  into  the  connection  between  the  Old  and  New 
Dispensations,  by  which  the  former  receives  its  meaning  as 
well  as  its  completion  only  in  the  latter. 

(2.)  Hefele's  second  argument  is  that  the  mistakes  made 
in  the  seventh  and  eighth  chapters  about  Jewish  ceremonies 
which  must  have  been  well  known  to  a  Levite  who  had  re- 
sided in  Jerusalem,  are  inconsistent  with  the  authorship  of 
one  who  had  been  a  Levite.  If  the  reader  will  take  the 
trouble  to  compare  these  chapters  with  the  references  given 
to  the  Old  Testament,  he  will  have  no  difficulty  in  appreciat- 
ing the  force  of  this  objection.  To  the  learned  student  of 
Jewish  antiquities  the  consideration  carries  still  greater  weight. 
It  seems  inconceivable  that  one  whose  express  duty  it  was  to 
carry  out  with  rigid  exactness  the  requirements  of  the  priestly 
code,  should  either  forget  them  or  misunderstand  their  nature. 
The   only   reply   suggested   is,    that   if    the    authorship   of 


48  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

Barnabas  be  rejected  on  this  ground,  it  is  impossible  to 
imagine  any  other  author  in  whose  case  they  would  be  easier 
to  explain.  Some,  however,  have  thought  from  an  expres- 
sion of  chap,  iii.,  which  seems  to  imply  that  the  author  was 
one  of  these  to  whom  he  writes,  and  therefore  a  Gentile,  that 
the  mistakes  arose  from  a  second-hand  acquaintance  with 
Jewish  rites,  natural  to  a  heathen  Christian  of  Alexandria, 
and  were  not  likely  to  be  detected  by  an  audience  equally 
ignorant  with  himself.  Yet,  in  the  face  of  the  approval  of 
the  epistle  by  such  men  as  Clement  and  Origen,  this  view  is 
difficult  to  maintain. 

(3.)  Hefele's  third  argument  is  drawn  from  its  erroneous 
teaching  with  regard  to  Judaism  and  the  meaning  of  God's 
old  covenant.  Undoubtedly  this  presents  a  grave  difficulty 
on  the  hypothesis  of  Barnabas'  authorship,  for  the  epistle  is 
in  direct  opposition  to  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  the  Law  as 
laid  down  in  the  Epistles  to  the  Romans  and  Galatians,  as 
well  as  to  the  view  given  in  the  Hebrews.  To  say  with  S. 
Paul,  that  the  legal  ordinances  were  transitory,  or  with  the 
writer  to  the  Hebrews,  that  they  were  typical,  is  one  thing ; 
to  say  that  they  were  never  meant  to  be  outwardly  observed 
at  all,  is  another.  Nevertheless,  there  are  points  in  S.  Paul's 
exegesis  which  come  very  near  to  that  of  Barnabas.^  And 
perhaps  the  latter  may  be  more  correctly  regarded  as  an  ex- 
treme and  one-sided  application  of  the  Pauline  view  than 
as  essentially  antagonistic  to  it.  Still,  the  writer's  entire 
inability  to  grasp  the  idea  of  development  so  forcibly 
expounded  by  S.  Paul,  must  lower  our  estimate  of  his  spiri- 
tual intelligence ;  and  those  who  would  fain  cherish  their 
scriptural  impressions  of  S.  Paul's  majestic  companion  will 
certainly  be  slow  to  admit  the  possibility  of  so  great  a 
falling  off. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  our  opinion  is  that  these  argu- 
ments are  fatal  to  the  authorship  of  Barnabas  or  any  other 
Apostle.     It  is  qtiite  possible  that  some  Alexandrian  Christian 

^  E.g.,  the  allegories  of  Sarah  and  Hagar,  and  of  the  "spiritual  follow- 
ing Rock"  (Gal.  iv.  24.  and  i  Cor,  x.  4),  and  more  especially  the  application 
of  Deut.  XXV.  4,  in  i  Cor.  ix.  9. 


THE  EPISTLE  OF   BARNABAS.  49 

of  the  name  of  Barnabas  may  have  written  it,  for  the  work 
is  evidently  of  Alexandrine  origin,  its  cast  of  thought  and 
mode  of  exegesis  being  such  as  could  hardly  have  arisen  else- 
where, and  its  earliest  and  indeed  only  reception  as  inspired 
Scripture  being  confined  to  the  Alexandrian  Church.  The 
date  is  fixed,  by  internal  evidence,  as  after  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  by  Titus,  and  before  that  by  Hadrian  (a.d.  70- 
132).  Several  dates  between  these  limits  have  been  assigned. 
Weizsacker  places  it  under  Vespasian  (a.d.  69-79)  j  Volkmar 
under  Hadrian  (a.d.  i  19-138);  Hilgenfeld  under  Nerva 
(a.d.  96-98). 

The  main  argument  of  all  these  theories  is  drawn  from  the 
interpretation  of  two  passages  in  the  fourth  chapter.  The 
first  is  a  free  quotation  from  Dan.  vii.  24,  "  Ten  kingdoms 
shall  reign  upon  the  earth,  and  after  them  shall  rise  up  a 
little  king,  who  shall  lay  low  three  of  the  kings  in  one."  The 
second,  which  follows  immediately  after,  is  from  Dan.  vii.  20. 
"  And  I  saw  the  fourth  beast  wicked  and  strong  and  unto- 
ward beyond  all  the  beasts  of  the  earth,  and  how  that  ten 
horns  sprang  up  out  of  it,  and  out  of  them  a  little  horn  as  an 
offshoot,  and  how  that  it  laid  low  three  of  the  great  horns  in 
one."     And  he  adds,  "  Ye  ought  therefore  to  understand." 

The  only  satisfactory  explanation  of  this  enigmatical 
passage  appears  to  us  to  be  that  given  by  Lightfoot.^  He 
points  out  that,  while  the  Caesars  are  evidently  intended, 
the  language  is  wrapped  up  in  mystery  to  avoid  the  danger 
of  high  treason.  Yet  the  application  must  be  sufficiently 
obvious  for  an  intelligent  reader  to  supply  it  for  himself. 
The  last  great  scene  of  the  world's  s^Diritual  history  is  sup- 
posed to  be  at  hand,  in  which  Antichrist  is  expected  to  appear 
and  wage  the  final  conflict  with  the  saints.  Counting  the 
Caesars  from  Julius  according  to  the  common  reckoning,  we 
arrive  at  Vespasian  as  the  tenth.  Now  this  prince  associated 
his  two  sons  Titus  and  Domitian  very  closely  with  him  in  the 
Empire,  so  much  so  that  it  scarcely  seemed  an  abuse  of  terms 
to  speak  of  them  as  three  "in  one."  ^     The  little  horn,  which 

^  Apostolic  Fathers,  S.  Clement,  vol.  ii.  p.  506  sqq. 

'^  It  will  be  noticed  that  the  puzzling  expression  rpLa  v(f>'  iv  is  inserted 

D 


50  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

is  represented  as  springing  out  of  the  ten,  and  yet  not  count- 
ing as  one  of  them,  in  fact  as  an  excrescence  or  offshoot,  is 
intended  to  apply  to  Nero,  whose  death  was  not  fully  believed, 
either  by  Christians  or  heathens,  both  of  whom,  for  many 
years,  anticipated  his  reappearance  or  resurrection,  the  one  with 
anxious  dread,  the  other  with  wistful  expectation.  For,  in- 
credible as  it  may  appear,  Nero  was  by  no  means  unpopular 
with  the  masses,  and  two,  if  not  three,  posthumous  claimants 
to  his  name  had  sufficient  following  to  threaten  seriously  the 
peace  of  the  Eoman  Empire.  The  Christians,  on  the  other 
hand,  had  lost  by  Nero's  death  the  awful  but  triumphant 
spell  of  conflict  for  which  they  had  prepared  themselves, 
and  which  was  in  their  eyes  the  necessary  preliminar}'  of 
Messiah's  reign.  Hence  the  plausibility  of  this  interpreta- 
tion of  Daniel's  words,  which  a  writer  impressed  with  their 
imminent  fulfilment  might  easily  hint  at  to  readers  equally 
eager,  and  equally  versed  in  prophecy  with  himself. 

The  result  of  accepting  Lightfoot's  view  is  to  fix  the  date 
within  Vespasian's  reign,  i.e.,  not  later  than  A.D.  78  or  79, 
and  probably  a  few  years  earlier.  This  brings  the  epistle 
well  within  the  apostolic  period,  before  several  of  the  New 
Testament  writings,  and  considerably  before  any  of  the  other 
relics  of  the  first  age ;  and  such  a  date  is  not  only  consistent 
with  the  scanty  and  obscure  historical  allusions,  but  also  with 
the  crude  and  undisciplined  style  of  Gnosis,  of  which  the 
author  is  so  proud.  If  the  epistle  were  much  later,  we  can 
hardly  believe  he  would  have  exposed  himself  to  possible 
misconstruction  as  exhibiting  Gnostic  affinities.  But  in 
that  early  period,  when  tendencies  afterwards  differentiated 
were  still  allowed  to  co-exist,  it  was  possible  for  an  ecclesi- 
astical writer  to  show  a  lack  of  precision  in  dogmatic  points, 
which  at  a  later  stage  of  development  would  have  impaired 
his  claim  to  orthodoxy.  Tried  by  this  test,  the  Christology 
of  our  epistle  certainly  fails  to  rise  to  the  Catholic  standard  ; 
nevertheless  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  author  accepted 

by  Barnabas,  but  does  not  occur  in  the  original  prophecy,  as  is  also 
the  case  with  the  epithet  "offshoot,"  Trapa4>vds,  applied  to  the  little 
horn. 


THE  EPISTLE   OF  BARNABAS.  51 

the  Divinity  of  Christ ;  but,  as  in  the  earlier  speeches  of  the 
Acts  and  some  of  the  epistles  in  the  New  Testament,  the 
idea  is  not  clearly"  expanded.  The  acceptance  of  the  work 
as  inspired  Scripture  by  Clement  and  Origen  is  much  easier 
to  explain  on  the  hypothesis  of  its  remote  antiquity  than  on 
that  of  its  origin  under  Hadrian,  a  time  comparatively  so 
near  their  own. 

Its  object  is  to  a  large  extent  controversial,  and  the  op- 
ponents whom  the  writer  has  in  view  are  not  Jewish  Chris- 
tians, but  Jews,  which  is  another  mark  of  antiquity.  We 
pronounce  it,  therefore,  though  with  hesitation,  as  beseems 
so  knotty  a  point,  the  earliest  Christian  document  out  of  the 
New  Testament. 

The  authorities  for  the  text  are  mainly  two,  the  Codex 
Sinaiticus,  in  which  it  is  found  entire,  and  the  Codex  Con- 
stantinopolitanus,  discovered  by  Bryennios  in  1875,  which 
also  contains  the  entire  epistle,  and  which  will  be  referred 
to  on  a  later  page.^  Both  these  important  MSS.  have 
been  recently  discovered.  Before  this  took  place  the  text  of 
Barnabas  depended  on  a  variety  of  codices,  all  derived,  though 
not  all  actually  transcribed,  from  the  same  original  in  which 
a  leaf  had  been  lost  containing  the  end  of  Polycarp's  Epistle 
and  the  first  portion  of  that  of  Barnabas,  which  was  accord- 
ingly lacking  in  all  the  derived  manuscripts.  The  missing 
portion  was  supplied  by  the  Latin  version,  which  dates  from 
a  very  early  period,^  and  is  complete,  with  the  exception  of 
the  last  four  chapters.  This  last  portion,  which  treats  of  the 
Two  Ways,  may  possibly  be  the  earliest  form  of  that  extremely 
popular  religious  manual.  It  has  certainly  been  closely  fol- 
lowed by  the  tract  entitled  "  Ordinances  of  Clement  and 
Ecclesiastical  Canons  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,"  on  which 
something  will  be  said  in  a  future  chapter.^  And  it  exhibits 
marked  affinities  with  the  treatment  of  the  same  subject  in 
the  Didach4.      Though   the   transition  from  chap.   xvii.   to 

1  See  pp.  36  and  57,  and  also  the  note  in  the  chapter  on  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions. 

-  Possibly  as  early  as  the  second  century. 

3  It  is  also  freely  used  by  the  author  of  the  Duct  Vice,  or  Judicium 
Petri  if  this  is  distinct  from  the  Ordinances. 


52 


THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 


the  new  departure  in  chap,  xviii.  is  certainly  very  abrupt, 
yet  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  the  authenticity  of  these 
chapters.  The  writer  may  have  added  them  at  a  somewhat 
later  period,  which  will  account  for  their  omission  from  the 
old  Latin  version.  But,  as  Harnack  and  Kendall  have  re- 
marked, their  style  corresponds  very  closely  with  that  of 
Barnabas,  and  though  they  were  retouched  rather  than  com- 
posed by  him,  being  doubtless  of  primitive  origin,  yet  he 
has  made  them  so  completely  his  own  as  to  render  it  wholly 
unnecessary  to  separate  them. 

Its  General  Argument. 

The  general  argument  of  the  treatise  is  to  prove  that 
Judaism,  at  any  rate  in  its  ceremonial  aspect,  is  not  an 
expression  of  the  Mind  of  God,  but  a  carnal  misinterpreta- 
tion of  commands  that  were  from  the  first  intended  to  be 
wholly  spiritual.  The  great  point  made  by  Jewish  contro- 
versialists was  this : — How  can  you  maintain  that  Christ,  the 
Son  of  Grod  and  revealer  of  His  will,  has  done  away  the  law, 
when  God  Himself,  the  unchanging  and  eternal  Father,  put 
forth  that  law  as  the  only  condition  of  salvation  ?  Within 
the  narrow  sphere  of  Kabbinical  exegesis  this  argument  was 
difiicult  if  not  impossible  to  answer.  It  was  necessary  to 
take  a  bolder  flight,  and  survey  the  Mosaic  system  from  a 
higher  standpoint.  Three  writers  address  themselves  to  this 
task — the  Apostle  Paul  in  the  Epistles  to  the  Komans  and 
Galatians,  Justin  Martyr  in  his  dialogue  with  Trypho,  and  our 
author.  By  none  of  the  three  is  the  argument  very  clearly 
conducted.  The  Apostle,  who  had  himself  been  trained  in 
the  Rabbinical  method,  seems  often  to  divert  his  logic  from 
its  natural  channel  in  order  to  accommodate  its  movements 
to  the  technical  requirements  of  an  artificial  theology.  Still, 
though  the  expression  is  obscure,  the  master-thought  is 
clear  enough,  that  Judaism  and  Christianity  are  successive 
moments  of  one  eternal  self-revealing  purpose,  and  that  the 
superseding  of  the  former  by  the  latter  in  no  way  invalidates 
its  claim  to  a  divine  origin.    This  line  of  argument  is  too  strong 


THE  EPISTLE  OF  BARNABAS.  53 

and  comprehensive  for  the  mind  of  Barnabas.  He  takes  the 
lower  ground  of  retaliating  upon  the  Jews  the  charge  of 
incapacity  to  understand  God's  will.  And  he  does  not  confine 
this  to  his  own  time,  but  carries  it  back  to  the  very  founda- 
tion of  Judaism.  So  far  from  the  Jewish  position  being 
true  that  the  Christians  annulled  the  Divine  Law,  it  is  the 
Jews'  own  assertion  that  is  false  in  attributing  that  law  to 
God.  The  truly  Divine  law  is  entirely  moral  and  spiritual. 
Those  features,  such  as  circumcision,  sacrifices,  sabbaths,  &c., 
which  to  the  Jews  are  co-extensive  with  their  religion,  were 
imposed  on  their  minds  by  the  persuasions  of  an  evil  angel. 
The  Divine  revelation  has  always  S23oken  in  one  and  the 
same  sense,  and  that  the  Christian.  In  establishing  this 
thesis,  Barnabas  betrays  the  unsoundness  of  his  critical 
method.  It  is  wholly  subjective.  It  relies  upon  a  supposed 
ethical  sense  underlying  the  literal,  not  as  a  secondary  or 
metaphorical  application  of  it,  but  as  the  only  true  reality,  to 
which  the  outward  expression  is  a  mere  glass-case.  Thus 
the  precept  not  to  eat  swine's  flesh  has  nothing  to  do  with 
the  question  of  food ;  it  means  that  we  are  not  to  defile  our- 
selves with  those  vices  of  which  swine  are  examples  :  and  this 
strain  is  harped  on  through  several  chapters — the  conclusions 
being  sound  and  spiritual,  but  the  process  absurd,  and  the 
iteration  wearisome. 

Another  feature  of  his  exegesis  is  its  discernment  of  Chris- 
tianity and  the  Cross  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  in  the  most  un- 
expected quarters — e.g.,  in  the  number  of  Abraham's  servants, 
which  in  Greek  numerals  gives  the  first  two  letters  of  the 
name  Jesus,  viz.,  |  H,  and  the  letter  J?  which  represents  His 
Cross.  In  this  peculiar  fancy  Barnabas  is  equalled,  or  indeed 
surpassed,  by  Justin,  who  presses  nearly  every  allusion  to  a  tree 
or  a  piece  of  wood  into  the  service  of  a  mechanical  Staurology. 
We  shall  have  occasion,  in  a  later  chapter,  to  note  the  con- 
spicuous falling  off  in  strength  of  conception  from  the  Pauline 
Epistles  to  the  later  anti- Jewish  Apologists.  Armed  as  they 
were  with  the  powerful  weapon  of  Greek  philosophy,  from 
which  S.  Paul  was  debarred,  they  never  succeed  in  reaching, 
as  he  did,  a  truly  comprehensive  platform,  from  which  it 


54  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

was  possible  to  be  at  once  just  to  Judaism  and  unsparing  of 
its  narrow  limitations.  The  fault  of  Barnabas,  as  of  the 
Gnostics,  lies  in  his  failure  to  connect  rationally  the  appear- 
ance and  work  of  Christ  in  Palestine  as  a  Jew,  with  his 
severe  depreciation  of  the  Jewish  element  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Justin  surpasses  him  in  breadth  and  candour,  but 
also  fails  in  appreciation  of  Israel's  spiritual  grandeur,  in 
which,  as  in  other  respects,  he  falls  infinitely  below  S.  Paul. 
We  conclude  with  a  translation  of  chapters  iv.  and  xv., 
which  are  favourable  examples  of  his  style,  and  show  the 
higher  aspect  of  his  teaching  : — 

The  Christians  Possessors  of  the  Covenant  forfeited  by 
THE  Jews. 

''  Moreover,  I  ask  you  this  also,  as  one  of  yourselves,  and  loving 
you  individually  and  collectively  more  than  my  own  life,  to  take 
heed  to  yourselves  and  not  resemble  some  who  heap  up  their  sins, 
affirming  that  the  covenant  is  theirs  and  ours.^  Ours  it  cer- 
tainly is.  But  they  {i.e.,  the  Jews)  have  invariably  lost  touch 
with  it  from  the  day  that  Moses  received  it.  The  Scrij)ture  saith, 
'  Moses  was  in  the  mount  fasting  forty  days  and  forty  nights, 
and  received  the  covenant  from  the  Lord,  viz.,  the  tables  of  stone 
written  with  the  finger  of  the  Lord'  But  tliey  lost  possession  of 
it  by  turning  to  idols.  For  the  Lord  saith  in  this  wise,  '  Moses, 
Moses,  go  down  quickly,  for  thy  people  whom  thou  hast  brought 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  have  transgressed.'  And  Moses  under- 
stood, and  hurled  the  two  tables  from  his  hands.  And  so  their 
covenant  was  broken  in  order  that  the  covenant  of  Jesus  the 
Beloved  might  be  sealed  in  our  heart  in  hope  of  the  faith  which 
is  in  Him.  Now,  because  I  write  to  you,  not  as  a  teacher,  but 
in  the  manner  of  one  who  loves  you,  not  to  fall  short  of  what  you 
possess,  I  have  taken  earnest  care  to  address  you,  I  who  am  your 
offscouring.  Therefore  let  us  take  heed  in  these  last  days.  For 
the  whole  time  of  our  faith  will  profit  us  nothing  if  we  do  not  in 
the  present  lawless  period  resist  the  coming  offences  as  becomes 
sons  of  God,  that  the  Black  One  -  may  not  have  an  opportunity 

1  Keferring  to  the  Judaising  sects  who  declared  that  the  Mosaic  law  was 
.still  binding  upon  Christians. 

-  Viz.,  the  angel  that  presides  over  the  way  of  darkness. 


THE  EPISTLE  OF  BARNABAS.  55 

of  entrance.  Let  us  flee  from  vanity,  let  us  perfectly  hate  the 
works  of  the  evil  way.  Do  not  shrink  into  yourselves  in  solitude 
as  already  justified,  but  come  together,  and  together  inquire  con- 
cerning the  common  welfare.  For  the  Scripture  saith,  'Woe 
to  those  who  are  wise  unto  themselves,  and  learned  in  their 
own  sight.'  So  let  us  be  spiritual,  let  us  be  a  temple  perfect 
for  God.' 


No.   2. — The  True  Doctrine  of  the  Sabbath. 

"  Moreover,  it  is  written  in  the  Decalogue  concerning  the 
Sabbath,  'And  ye  shall  hallow  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord  with 
pure  hands  and  a  pure  heart.'  And  in  another  place  He  saith, 
'If  thy  sons  shall  keep  my  Sabbath,  then  will  I  send  My  mercy 
upon  them.'  He  makes  mention  of  the  Sabbath  at  the  beginning 
of  creation,  '  And  God  made  in  six  days  the  works  of  His  hands, 
and  finished  them  on  the  seventh  day,  and  rested  on  it  and 
hallowed  it.'  Mark,  my  children,  the  meaning  of  those  words, 
'  finished  in  six  days.'  The  meaning  is  that  God  the  Lord  will 
finish  everything  in  6000  years.  For  one  day  with  Him  is  as 
1000  years.  He  Himself  attests  this:  'Behold!  this  present 
da}^  shall  be  as  1000  years.'  Consequently,  my  children,  all  shall 
be  finished  in  six  days,  i.e.,  in  6000  years.  'And  rested  the 
seventh  day.'  This  means  that  when  His  Son  shall  come  and 
destroy  the  opportunity  of  the  ungodly  one,  and  judge  the 
impious,  and  change  the  sun  and  moon  and  stars,  then  shall  He 
rest  well  on  the  seventh  day.  Furthermore  he  saith,  '  Thou  shalt 
hallow  it  with  pure  hands  and  a  pure  heart.'  If,  then,  a  man 
who  is  not  pure  in  heart  can  now  keep  the  day  which  the  Lord 
hath  hallowed,  then  indeed  we  are  utterly  in  error.  See  whether 
we  shall  not  then  rest  well  and  keep  it  holy  when  we  shall  have 
been  justified  and  have  received  this  promise ;  and  iniquity  shall 
no  longer  exist,  and  all  things  shall  be  made  new  by  the  Lord ; 
and  we  shall  then  be  able  to  hallow  it,  for  we  shall  first  have 
been  sanctified  ourselves.  Farther,  he  saith  unto  them  (^'.e.,  the 
Jews),  'Your  new  moons  and  your  sabbaths  I  cannot  away 
with.'  Ye  see  how  He  speaks.  The  present  sabbaths  are  not 
acceptable  to  Me,  but  the  one  which  I  have  made,  when  I  shall 
cause  all  things  to  cease  and  make  the  beginning  of  the  eighth 
day,  which  is  the  beginning  of  another  world.  Wherefore  we 
also   {i.e.,    Christians)    keep    the   eighth    day    for   rejoicing,    in 


56  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

which  Jesus  both  rose  from  the  dead  and  manifestly  ascended 
into  heaven."  ^ 

^  In  this  point  Barnabas  agrees  with  the  so-called  Gospel  of  Peter,  but  is 
at  variance  with  the  tradition  of  the  Church.  He  again  departs  from  it  in 
his  assertion  in  ch.  v.  that  the  Apostles  were  men  of  extraordinary  sinful- 
ness before  Christ  called  them.  Origen  (Cels.  i.  63)  quotes  and  seems  to 
acquiesce  in  this  view.  Probably  it  appeared  to  bring  into  greater  relief 
the  power  of  God's  grace.  But  the  instinct  of  the  Church  has  beyond 
question  rightly  repudiated  it. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE  APOSTLES.^ 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  in  the  first  book  of  his  Stromateis, 
has  the  following  passage,  ''  This  man  is  spoken  of  as  a  thief 
by  the  Scripture.  The  words  are,  '  My  son,  be  not  a  liar ; 
for  lying  leads  to  theft.'  "  The  origin  of  this  quotation  was 
long  unknown,  and  the  Scripture  referred  to  was  a  matter  of 
conjecture.  Again,  Eusebius,  in  his  account  of  the  canon 
given  in  the  third  book  of  his  history,  places  last  among  the 
ecclesiastical  but  uncanonical  books  (yoOa)  of  Scripture  a 
treatise  which  he  calls  "  The  Teachings,  so  called,  of  the 
Apostles.'^  He  speaks  of  it  as  used  in  some  churches,  but 
excludes  it  from  the  class  of  generally  received  (6/xo\oyovjjb€va) 
and  even  of  controverted  writings  {avTi\e<y6^eva).  A  frag- 
ment supposed  to  be  from  Iren^us  also  refers  to  a  similar 
work,  called  "  The  Second  Ordina7iccs  of  the  Apostles.^'  Various 
attempts  were  made  by  scholars  to  fix  on  some  of  the  exist- 
ing treatises  as  fulfilling  the  conditions  of  these  allusions, 
but  without  success.  It  has  been  reserved  for  the  present 
generation  to  bring  to  light  the  long-lost  fragment,  and  to 
connect  together  the  scattered  and  puzzling  notices  of  what 
was  evidently  held  to  be  a  quasi-inspired  work. 

In  the  year  1875  Philotheus  Bryennios,  Metropolitan  of 
Nicomedia,  made  the  discovery  that  in  a  manuscript  kept  in 
the  Jerusalem  Monastery  of  the  Most  Holy  Sepulchre  in  Con- 
stantinople was  contained,  among  other  works  of  interest,  a 
short  treatise  entitled  "  Teaching  of  the  Lord  to  the  Gentiles 
through  the  Twelve  AjDOstles."  Bryennios  subjected  it  to 
a  thorough  investigation,  and  did  not  make  it  public  until 
1883.  The  learned  world  received  it  with  the  greatest 
interest,  and  within  a  very  short  time  it  had  passed  satis- 

'   Atoaxv  Tuiu  i/3  atroaToXuv. 

57 


58  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

factorily  through  the  ordeal  of  criticism,  and  was  generally 
accepted  as  the  original  lost  treatise,  of  semi-scriptural 
authority,  referred  to  by  Clement  and  Eusebius.  Though 
its  intrinsic  inferiority  to  the  Scriptures  is  immediately 
evident,  and  it  seems  strange  that  so  jooor  a  composition 
should  have  gained  even  the  lowest  place  on  the  canonical 
record,  yet  its  historical  importance  may  be  estimated  by 
the  fact  that  most  scholars  attribute  its  composition  to  the 
last  years  of  the  first  century,  the  time  when  Clement  was 
writing  his  Epistle,  a  little  after  Barnabas,  but  before  Hermas 
and  before  Ignatius.  Some  scholars,  it  is  true,  place  it  a 
little  later,  within  the  first  quarter  of  the  second  century. 
However  this  may  be,  it  may  safely  be  allowed  to  rank  among 
the  earliest  documents  of  the  post-apostolic  Church. 

The  treatise  is  very  short,  filling  but  a  few  pages,  but  it 
sheds  much  light  upon  the  obscure  interval  that  separates 
the  close  of  the  New  Testament  from  the  rise  of  Apologetic 
literature,  perhaps  the  least  known  period  in  the  entire 
history  of  the  Church.  It  professes  to  embody  the  apostolic 
rule  of  Christian  life,  together  with  directions  as  to  worship 
and  administration  of  the  sacraments.  It  is  intended  both 
for  teachers  and  congregations,  and  formed  the  basis  of  the 
various  more  elaborate  manuals  that  were  circulated  as  apos- 
tolic in  later  times.  It  consists  of  four  divisions — I.  A  sum- 
mary of  practical  Christianity  under  the  title  of  *'  The  Tioo 
Ways,  the  Way  of  Life  and  the  Way  of  Death'''  2.  A  short 
ritual  and  liturgical  manual.  3.  An  account  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical organisation  of  the  period.  4.  A  brief  statement  of 
Christian  eschatology. 

Each  of  these  divisions  contains  matters  of  great  interest. 

I.  The  first,  which  borrows  its  title  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment,^ most  probably  formed  an  original  part  of  the  Apostles' 
teaching.  At  all  events,  it  struck  very  deep  roots  in  the 
early  Church.  So  much  of  it  is  reproduced  in  the  Epistle  of 
Barnabas  ^  that  we  may  feel  quite  sure  that,  if  one  writer  did 

1  Jer.  xxi.  8. 

-  Though  it  is  often  assumed  that  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  draws  upon 
the  Didache,  yet  this  is  by  no  means  certain,  and  several  scholars  are  of 


THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE  APOSTLES.      59 

not  borrow  from  the  other,  both  drew  from  a  still  more 
primitive  source,  which  may  have  been  entitled  "  The  Two 
Ways  of  Life  and  Death,"  or  possibly,  as  we  find  it  in 
Barnabas,  "  The  Ways  of  Light  and  Darkness."  The  Shep- 
herd of  Hermas  also  reproduces  the  idea  under  the  form  of 
"The  Straight  and  Crooked  Ways,"  and  the  Apostolical  Con- 
stitutions at  a  later  date  betray  a  close  familiarity  with  it. 
The  moral  teaching  of  the  "  Two  Ways  "  is  substantially  that 
of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  arranged  under  heads,  and 
intended  for  the  systematic  instruction  of  catechumens. 
Very  little  dogmatic  theology  is  introduced,  and  no  creed 
is  inserted.  We  must  not,  however,  infer  from  this  that  no 
syllabus  of  the  Faith  was  in  use  at  the  time  of  its  composi- 
tion, but  partly  that  the  writer's  object  was  practical  rather 

opinion  that  both  are  based  upon  a  common,  and  that  a  pre-Christian, 
source.  The  very  scanty  amount  of  Christian  references  in  tlie  "Two 
Ways  "  of  Barnabas,  as  compared  with  those  in  the  Bidache,  makes  it  pro- 
bable that  the  Didache  has  been  remodelled  upon  the  basis  of  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount.  Such  manuals  were  in  use  among  the  Jews  of  our  Lord's 
time,  and  would  naturally  suggest  to  a  Jewish  Christian  the  form  in  which 
to  cast  a  similar  production  of  his  own.  Hence  we  are  led  to  ask  whether 
any  traces  can  be  found  of  a  Bidache  earlier  than  that  brought  to  light  by 
Bryennios.  Apparently  there  are  such  traces.  The  Egyptian  Church 
Ordinances,  a  document  allied  to  the  Apostolical  Constitutions,  on  which 
more  will  be  said  hereafter,  agrees  with  Barnabas  in  omitting  all  refer- 
ences to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  in  its  account  of  the  "  Two  Ways,"  but 
differs  from  him  in  other  points  in  which  it  agrees  with  a  fragmentary 
Latin  version  called  Doctrina  Apostolorum,  discovered  by  Gebhardt,  and 
undoubtedly  of  high  antiquity.  This  Latin  version  carries  us  back  as  near 
to  the  original  form  of  the  Didache  as  we  are  likely  to  get,  and  affords 
evidence  that  our  existing  Bidache  has  been  amplified  and  supplemented 
in  those  sections  (the  "  Two  Ways  ")  which  are  common  to  both.  The 
main  factor  in  estimating  the  influence  of  our  present  Bidache  is  the  con- 
sideration that  it  was  a  local  document,  intended  mainly  for  the  Juda}0- 
Christian  churches  of  Palestine  and  Syria,  and  never  attained  to  any 
wide  circulation  in  the  Church  at  large.  Its  honoured  position  among  the 
quasi-inspired  books  in  no  way  contradicts  this  view,  for  its  great  an- 
tiquity, its  authoritative  tone,  its  Palestinian  origin,  were  all  in  its  favour. 
And  the  numerous  amplifications  of  it  which  appeared  in  Syria  and  Egypt 
testify  to  a  high  appreciation  of  its  contents  by  those  who  undertook  to 
adapt  it  to  wnder  use.  Scholars  like  Clement,  Origen,  and  Eusebius,  who 
made  it  their  business  to  read  all  the  ecclesiastical  literature  that  came  in 
their  wav,  are  almost  the  sole  authorities  who  name  the  work. 


6o  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

than  doctrinal,  and  partly  that  the  particular  section  of  the 
Church  for  which  he  wrote  was  already  familiar  with  the 
leading  articles  of  the  faith. 

2.  The  second  part,  which  deals  with  Baptism,  Prayer  and 
Fasting,  and  the  Holy  Eucharist,  is  not  less  noticeable  for 
its  extreme  conciseness  than  for  the  primitive  character  of 
its  injunctions.  Baptism  is  ordered  to  be  performed  in  the 
Triune  Name  by  threefold  immersion  in  running  water,  or  in 
default  of  this,  in  any  pure  cold  water,  or  in  warm  water,  if 
necessary  on  account  of  health.  Failing  a  supply  of  water 
sufficient  for  immersion,  threefold  affusion  is  allowed.  Both 
baptizer  and  baptized  are  required  to  fast  previously  to  the 
sacrament.  Nothing  is  said  as  to  the  necessity  of  baptism  by 
an  ordained  minister,  or  of  the  spiritual  significance  of  the  rite. 

The  fast  days  are  the  Wednesday  and  Friday  in  each  week. 
The  Lord's  Prayer,  given  almost  exactly  as  in  S.  Matthew,^ 
is  to  be  repeated  three  times  every  day.  The  Eucharist  is  to 
be  preceded  by  a  thanksgiving  for  the  cup  and  for  the  bread, 
and  followed  by  another  prayer  of  thanks  for  God's  mercies. 
At  the  close  of  the  act  of  worship,  the  prophets  are  allowed 
to  give  thanks  in  their  own  words. 

In  this  and  other  injunctions  we  observe  the  freedom  of 
the  first  age  co-existing  with  the  beginnings  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal formularies  and  disciplinary  regulations.  The  period  is 
clearly  one  of  transition,  when  the  house  is  being  set  in  order 
with  a  view  to  impending  changes,  though  they  are  not  ex- 
pected at  once.  The  whole  circle  of  ideas  in  which  the 
document  moves  is  precisely  what  might  be  expected  by 
those  who  accept  the  main  results  of  criticism  as  applied  to 
the  origines  of  the  Church;  but  it  is  in  startling  contrast 
with  many  of  the  traditionally  accepted  views,  and  cannot 
fail,  when  its  influence  has  had  time  to  work,  materially  to 
modify  them. 

3.  The  third  part  gives  directions  with  regard  to  apostles 
and  prophets,  how  to  receive  them,  how  to  distinguish  the 
true  from  the  false,  and  how  to  apportion  their  maintenance. 

^  In  the  doxology,  "  the  kingdom  "  is  omitted,  perhaps  by  accident,  and 
there  are  one  or  two  other  slight  variations. 


THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE  APOSTLES.      6i 

The  observance  of  the  Lord's  Day  is  next  enjoined,  by 
breaking  of  bread,  and  giving  of  thanks,  after  confession 
made  in  the  presence  of  the  congregation.  Then  follow 
directions  to  appoint  bishops  and  deacons,  "  to  minister  the 
service  of  the  prophets  and  teachers." 

4.  The  fourth  part  calls  on  the  faithful  to  watch  for  the 
coming  of  the  Lord,  in  order  that  they  may  partake  in  the 
resurrection  of  the  saints,  which  the  writer  believes  will  pre- 
cede the  universal  judgment. 

From  this  brief  summary,  it  will  be  at  once  perceived  that 
a  very  primitive  state  of  the  Church  is  here  presented. 
Apostles  still  exist,  but  by  them  we  are  to  understand 
certain  companions  or  followers  of  the  Twelve,  not  the 
Twelve  themselves,  the  name  being  used  in  a  general  sense, 
as  in  several  passages  of  the  New  Testament.  The  pro- 
phetic office  is  also  in  full  vigour,  itinerant  apostles  and 
prophets  being  apparently  the  chief  authorities  of  the 
Church.  Side  by  side  with  these  are  the  bishops  and 
deacons,  who  have  evidently  taken  their  position  as  per- 
manent officials  to  exercise  local  government,  as  distinct 
from  the  general  and  temporary  supervision  exercised  by 
the  apostles  and  prophets.  The  order  of  presbyters  is  no- 
where mentioned,  a  sure  mark  of  antiquity,  showing  their 
identity  with  the  Episcopi  or  Bishops. 

Another  feature  which  recalls  the  primitive  Church  is  the 
non-separation  of  the  Agape  from  the  Eucharistic  service,  just 
as  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  and  elsewhere  in  the 
New  Testament.  The  permission  of  extempore  prayer  of  the 
prophets  agrees  also  with  New  Testament  usage,  though  both 
these  customs  lingered  on  into  the  second  century. 

Other  signs  of  antiquity  are,  the  very  slight  allusions  to 
any  written  Gospel  (chap.  viii.  §  2  ;  chap.  xi.  §  3)  and  the 
omission  of  any  direction  for  reading  the  Christian  Scrip- 
tures in  the  Lord's  Day  service.  With  regard  to  bajotism, 
that  of  adult  converts  ouly  appears  to  be  contemplated, 
though,  doubtless,  the  children  of  Christian  families  were 
from  the  first  admitted  to  this  sacrament  with  their  parents. 
But  there  is  no  explicit  reference  to  infant  baptism. 


62  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

It  remains  to  say  a  few  words  about  the  style  and  language 
of  the  book,  and  about  its  place  of  writing.  Though,  as 
already  remarked,  it  was  by  some  churches  accepted  as  Scrip- 
ture, there  is  no  claim  to  inspiration  advanced  in  the  work 
itself,  and  its  modest  tone  contrasts  very  favourably  with  the 
exaggerated  pretensions  of  later  manuals.  There  breathes 
throughout  an  air  of  sincerity,  even  of  simplicity,  combined 
with  reverence,  which  stamps  the  document  as  authentic, 
that  is,  as  being  what  it  professes  to  be,  a  summary  of  what 
the  author  had  learnt  from  personal  instruction  or  oral  tra- 
dition to  be  the  Apostles'  teaching.  The  diction  is  extremely 
similar  to  that  of  the  New  Testament.  Out  of  552  words, 
Schaff  finds  504  identical  in  usage  with  those  of  the  New 
Testament;  15  occur  first  in  the  DidaM,  and  14  occur  in 
the  New  Testament  with  different  meanings. 

The  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  are  two  only.^ 
Those  from  the  New  Testament  are  more  numerous,  but  are 
confined  to  S.  Matthew,  with  whose  Gospel  the  author  was 
almost  certainly  acquainted.  Several  reminiscences  from 
other  books  occur,  chiefly  S.  Luke's  writings,  and  it  is  pro- 
bable that  he  was  acquainted  with  some,  at  least,  of  S. 
Paul's  epistles.  But  he  shows  no  familiarity  with  the  dis- 
tinctive Pauline  doctrines,  his  point  of  view  approaching 
much  more  nearly  to  that  of  the  synoptic  Gospels  and  the 
Epistle  of  S.  James. 

The  place  of  composition  is  thought  by  some  scholars  to 
have  been  Alexandria,  but  others,  with  more  probability, 
connect  it  with  Palestine  or  Syria.  The  Judaso-Christian 
communities  were  not  much  influenced  by  Pauline  teaching, 
and  the  theology  of  S.  James  continued  for  some  time  to 
predominate  among  them.  The  book  must  have  been  known 
at  Antioch,  where  it  was  expanded,  and  finally  superseded 
by  the  Pseudo-Clementine  wi'itings.  Some  have  conjectured 
that  the  author  was  Symeon  of  Jerusalem,  and  that  he  wrote 
it  at  Pella  for  the  use  of  the  surrounding  lieathen  converts. 
In  any  case  it  is  probably  the  work  of  a  Judaao-Christian,  either 
a  pupil  of  the  Apostles  or  of  their  immediate  associates.     The 

^  Mai.  i.  II.  14.  and  Zech.  xiv.  5. 


THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE  APOSTLES.      63 

great  historical  interest  of  the  work  justifies  us  in  appending 
a  translation  of  it,  which  will  give  the  reader  an  opportunity 
of  judging  for  himself  its  merits  and  importance : — 


THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  LORD  TO  THE  GENTILE8 
THROUGH  THE  TWELVE  APOSTLES. 

Part  L — Chapter  i. 

1 .  There  are  two  ways,  one  of  life  and  one  of  death  :  and  there 
is  a  great  difference  between  the  two  ways. 

2.  The  way  of  life  is  this.  First,  thou  shalt  love  God  who 
made  thee :  second,  (thou  shalt  love)  thy  neighbour  as  thj^self. 
And  all  things  whatsoever  thou  dost  not  wish  to  be  done  to  thee, 
those  do  not  thou  to  another. 

3.  Now  the  teaching  of  these  words  is  as  follows.  Bless  those 
that  curse  you  and  pray  for  your  enemies,  and  fast  for  those  that 
persecute  you.  For  what  thank  is  it,  if  ye  love  them  that  love 
you  1  Do  not  even  the  Gentiles  the  same  ?  But  do  ye  love  those 
that  hate  you,  and  ye  shall  not  have  an  enemy. 

4.  Abstain  from  fleshly  and  bodily  desires.  If  any  one  give 
thee  a  blow  on  the  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the  other  also,  and 
thou  shalt  be  perfect.  If  a  man  compel  thee  to  go  a  mile,  go 
with  him  twain.  If  a  man  take  thy  cloak,  give  him  thy  coat 
also.  If  a  man  take  from  thee  what  is  thine,  ask  it  not  back,  for, 
indeed,  thou  canst  not. 

5.  Give  to  every  one  that  asketh  thee  and  ask  it  not  again  :  for 
the  Father  wills  to  give  to  all  of  his  own  gracious  gifts.  Blessed 
is  he  that  giveth  according  to  the  commandment,  for  he  is  with- 
out guilt.  Woe  to  him  that  receiveth.  For  if  a  man  receiveth 
that  hath  need,  he  shall  be  guiltless.  But  he  that  hath  no  need 
shall  be  punished,  because  he  received,  and  up  to  the  amount; 
and  being  in  durance,  shall  be  examined  as  to  his  deeds,  and 
shall  not  come  out  thence  till  he  have  paid  the  uttermost  farthing. 

6.  Moreover  it  is  laid  down  on  this  head.  Let  thine  alms 
sweat  within  thine  hands,  until  thou  knowest  to  whom  thou  nit 
giving  it. 

Chapter  2. 

1.  The  second  commandment  of  the  teaching  is — 

2.  Thou  shalt  do  no  murder,  thou  shalt  not  commit  adulteiy, 
thou  shalt  not  corrupt  boys,  thou  shalt  not  commit  fornication 


64  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

thou  shalt  not  steal,  thou  shalt  not  deal  in  magic,  thou  shalt 
not  make  philtres,  thou  shalt  not  procure  abortion,  nor  slay  a 
child  that  is  born :  thou  shalt  not  covet  that  which  is  thy 
neighbour's. 

3.  Thou  shalt  not  perjure  thyself,  thou  shalt  not  bear  false 
witness,  thou  shalt  not  speak  ill  of  any  one,  thou  shalt  not  bear 
a  grudge. 

4.  Thou  shalt  not  be  double-minded  or  double-tongued.  For 
a  double  tongue  is  a  snare  of  death. 

5.  Thy  word  shall  not  be  false  or  empty,  but  filled  with  accom- 
plishment. 

6.  Thou  shalt  not  be  grasping  nor  greedy,  nor  a  hypocrite,  nor 
ill-natured,  nor  proud.  Thou  shalt  not  take  evil  counsel  against 
thy  neighbour. 

7.  Thou  shalt  not  hate  anyone  :  but  some  thou  shalt  convince, 
and  to  some  thou  shalt  give  way,  and  others  thou  shalt  love 
above  thine  own  life. 

Chapter  3. 

1.  My  child,  flee  from  (one  that  is)  evil,  and  from  all  that  is 
like  unto  him. 

2.  Be  not  wrathful :  for  wrath  leads  to  murder.  Be  not  a 
zealot  nor  a  wrangler  nor  passionate.  For  from  all  these  things 
murders  arise. 

3.  My  child,  be  not  lustful,  for  lust  leadeth  to  fornication  : 
nor  of  base  converse,  nor  given  to  raising  thy  eyes,  for  from 
these  things  adulteries  arise. 

4.  My  child,  be  not  a  soothsayer  :  for  this  leadeth  to  idolatry  ; 
nor  given  to  charms,  astrology,  or  lustrations,  nor  even  be  willing 
to  look  at  them,  for  from  all  these  things  idolatry  proceedeth. 

5.  My  child,  be  not  a  liar  :  for  a  lie  leadeth  to  theft ;  nor 
mone^Moving,  nor  vain-glorious  :  for  from  all  these  things  thefts 
arise. 

6.  My  child,  be  not  a  murmurer,  for  it  leadeth  to  blasphemy  ; 
nor  conceited,  nor  evil- thinking ;  for  from  all  these  things  blas- 
phemies arise. 

7.  But  be  meek,  for  the  meek  shall  inherit  the  eartli. 

8.  Be  long-suffering,  and  pitiful,  and  guileless,  and  quiet,  and 
good,  and  reverencing  continually  the  words  which  thou  hast 
heard. 

9.  Thou  shalt  not  exalt  thyself,  nor  give  rashness  to  thy  soul. 


THE  TEACHING   OF  THE  TWELVE  APOSTLES.      65 

Thy  soul  shall  not  be  joined  with  the  lofty,  but  thou  shalt  hold 
converse  with  the  just  and  the  humble. 

10.  The  troubles  that  befall  thee  receive  as  good  things,  know- 
ing that  nothing  happeneth  without  God. 

Chapter  4. 

1.  My  child,  remember  him  that  speaketh  the  Word  of  God 
to  thee  by  day  and  by  night.  Thou  shalt  honour  him  as  the 
Lord.  For  in  whatsoever  quarter  the  Lordship  is  spoken, 1  there 
is  the  Lord. 

2.  Thou  shalt  seek  out  day  by  day  the  faces  of  the  saints,  that 
thou  mayest  rest  in  their  words. 

3.  Thou  shalt  not  make  a  division,  but  shalt  set  at  one  those 
that  quarrel.  Thou  shalt  judge  justly,  thou  shalt  not  respect 
persons  in  convicting  of  transgressions. 

4.  Thou  shalt  not  be  of  two  minds  whether  a  thing  shall  be 
or  not. 

5.  Be  not  one  to  stretch  out  the  hand  for  receiving  and  close 
it  up  for  giving. 

6.  If  thou  hast  (money),  thou  shalt  give  it  by  thy  hand  as  a 
ransom  for  thy  sins. 

7.  Thou  shalt  not  hesitate  in  giving  nor  murmur  while  thou 
givest :  for  thou  shalt  know  who  is  the  good  recompenser  of 
the  reward. 

8=  Thou  shalt  not  turn  away  from  him  that  is  in  need,  but 
shalt  share  all  things  with  thy  brother,  and  shalt  not  say  that 
they  are  thine  own  :  for  if  we  are  sharers  in  the  Immortal  One, 
how  much  more  in  things  mortal  1 

9.  Thou  shalt  not  remove  thine  hand  from  thy  son  or  thy 
daughter,  but  shalt  teach  them  from  their  youth  up  the  fear  of 
the  Lord. 

10.  Thou  shalt  not  command  with  bitterness  thy  slave  or  thy 
maiden,  who  hope  in  the  same  God,  lest  they  fear  not  the  God 
that  is  over  you  both.  For  He  cometh  not  to  call  you  by  respect 
of  persons,  but  those  for  whom  He  has  made  ready  the  Spirit. 

11.  And  do  ye,  slaves,  submit  to  your  masters  in  reverence 
and  fear  as  to  a  type  of  God. 

12.  Thou  shalt  hate  all  hypocrisy  and  all  that  is  not  pleasing 
to  the  Lord. 

13.  Thou  shalt  not  forsake  the  commandments  of  the  Lord, 

^  7.C.,  where  Christ  is  confessed  to  be  the  Lord. 


66  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

but  shalt  keep  what  thou  hast  received,  neither  adding  thereto 
nor  taking  therefrom. 

14.  Thou  shalt  confess  thy  transgressions  in  the  church,  and 
shalt  not  come  to  thy  prayer  with  an  evil  conscience. 

This  is  the  way  of  life. 

Chapter  5. 

1.  And  the  way  of  death  is  this.  First  of  all,  it  is  evil  and 
full  of  curse.  Murders,  adulteries,  lusts,  fornications,  thefts, 
idolatries,  magic,  incantations,  plunderings,  false-witness,  hypo- 
crisies, double-heartedness,  craftiness,  pride,  villainy,  conceit, 
covetousness,  base  conversation,  jealousy,  rashness,  loftiness, 
insolence. 

2.  Persecutors  of  good  men,  hating  truth,  lo^dng  a  lie,  not 
knowing  the  reward  of  righteousness,  not  joined  to  goodness  nor 
to  just  judgment,  asking  not  to  do  good  but  evil :  far  from 
whom  is  meekness  and  patience  ;  loving  vanity,  pursuing  compen- 
sation, not  pitying  the  poor,  not  sorrowing  over  him  that  is  in 
trouble,  not  knowing  Him  that  made  them,  murderers  of  chil- 
dren, destroyers  of  the  creation  of  God,  turning  away  from  him 
that  is  in  need,  grinding  down  the  distressed,  flatterers  of  the  rich, 
unrighteous  judges  of  the  poor,  full  of  all  sin  :  may  ye  be  delivered, 
my  children,  from  all  these. 

Chapter  6. 

1 .  See  that  no  one  cause  thee  to  wander  from  this  way  of  doc- 
trine, for  (such  a  one)  teaches  thee  apart  from  God. 

2.  For  if  thou  canst  bear  the  whole  yoke  of  the  Lord,  thou 
shalt  be  perfect ;  but  if  not,  do  what  thou  canst. 

3.  In  the  matter  of  meat  bear  what  thou  canst.  But  abstain 
strictly  from  meat  offered  to  idols,  for  it  is  the  service  of  dead 
gods. 

Part  II. — Chapter  7. 

Baptism. 

1.  Concerning  baptism,  baptize  in ;, this  wise  :  Having  said  all 
these  things  beforehand,  baptize  (dip)  into  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  living  (running)  water. 

2.  But  if  thou  hast  no  running  water,  baptize  into  other 
water :  and  if  thou  art  not  able  (to  use)  cold,  use  warm. 


THE  TEACHING  OF   THE  TWELVE  APOSTLES.      67 

3.  But  if  thou  hast  neither,  pour  water  three  times  upon  the 
head  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost. 

4.  Before  baptism,  let  the  baptizer  and  the  baptized  fast  with 
such  others  as  can ;  and  thou  shalt  require  the  baptized  to  fast 
one  or  two  days  beforehand. 


Ghapter  8. 
Prayer  and  Fasting. 

1.  Let  not  your  fastings  be  with  the  hypocrites  ;  for  they  fast 
on  the  second  and  fifth  days  after  the  Sabbath  :  but  do  ye  fast 
on  the  fourth  and  sixth  days  of  the  week. 

2.  Neither  pray  ye  as  the  hypocrites,  but  as  the  Lord  com- 
manded in  His  Gospel,  so  pray  ye  :  Our  Father  which  art  in 
heaven,  hallowed  be  Thy  name,  Thy  kingdom  come,  Thy  will  be 
done  in  earth  as  it  is  in  heaven.  Give  us  this  day  our  daily 
bread,  and  forgive  us  our  debt,  as  we  also  forgive  our  debtors. 
And  lead  us  not  into  temptation,  but  deliver  us  from  evil.  For 
thine  is  the  power  and  the  glory  for  ever. 

3.  Use  this  prayer  three  times  a  day. 

Chapter  9. 

The  Eucharist. 

1.  Concerning  the  Eucharist,  thus  give  thanks  (or  "celebrate 
the  Eucharist "). 

2.  First,  concerning  the  cup — "  We  give  Thee  thanks,  O  Our 
Father,  for  the  holy  vine  of  David  Thy  servant,  which  Thou  hast 
made  known  to  us  by  Jesus  Thy  Servant.  Glory  be  to  Thee  for 
ever." 

3.  Concerning  the  broken  bread— "  We  give  Thee  thanks,  0 
Our  Father,  for  the  life  and  knowledge,  which  Thou  hast  made 
known  to  us  by  Jesus  Thy  Servant.  Glory  be  to  Thee  for 
ever." 

4.  "  As  this  broken  bread  was  scattered  upon  the  mountains, 
and  being  gathered  together  became  one,  so  let  Thy  Church  be 
gathered  together  from  the  ends  of  the  earth  into  Thy  kingdom  : 
for  Thine  is  the  glory  and  the  power,  through  Jesus  Christ,  for 
•ever." 

5.  Let  no  one  eat  or  drink  of  your  Eucharist,  except  those 


68  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

who  have  been  baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Lord.  For  con- 
cerning this  the  Lord  hath  said,  "  Give  not  that  which  is  holy 
unto  dogs." 

Chapter  io. 

1.  After  ye  are  filled,  thus  give  thanks  : — 

2.  "We  give  Thee  thanks,  Holy  Father,  for  Thy  holy  Name, 
which  Thou  hast  caused  to  dwell  in  our  hearts,  and  for  the  know- 
ledge and  faith  and  immortality  which  Thou  hast  made  known  to 
us  by  Jesus  Thy  Servant.      Glory  be  to  Thee  for  ever." 

3.  "  Almighty  Lord,  Thou  hast  created  all  things  for  the  sake 
of  Thy  Name.  Thou  hast  given  food  and  drink  to  men  for  enjoy- 
ment, that  they  may  give  Thee  thanks,  and  Thou  hast  graciously 
given  spiritual  food  and  drink  and  eternal  life  through  Thy 
Servant." 

4.  "  Before  all  things,  we  give  thanks  to  Thee,  because  Thou 
art  mighty.     Glory  be  to  Thee  for  ever." 

5.  "  Lord,  remember  Thy  Church,  to  deliver  it  from  all  evil, 
and  to  perfect  it  in  Thy  love,  and  gather  it  together,  the  sancti- 
fied one,  from  the  four  winds  into  Thy  kingdom,  which  Thou  hast 
prepared  for  it.     For  Thine  is  the  power  and  the  glory  for  ever.'^ 

6.  "  Let  grace  come,  and  let  this  world  pass  away.  Hosanna 
to  the  God  of  David.  If  any  is  holy,  let  him  come ;  if  any  is  not 
so,  let  him  repent.      Maranatha.     Amen." 

7.  Allow  ye  the  prophets  to  give  thanks  as  shall  seem  good  to 
them. 

Part  III. — Chapter  ii. 

Apostles  and  Prophets. 

1.  Whosoever  shall  come  and  teach  you  all  these  things  afore- 
said, receive  him. 

2.  But  if  the  teacher  turn  and  teach  another  doctrine  to  destroy 
(this),  hear  him  not ;  but  if  he  teach  with  a  view  to  adding 
righteousness  and  knowledge  of  the  Lord,  receive  him  as  the 
Lord. 

3.  Concerning  the  Apostles  and  Prophets  according  to  the 
decree  of  the  Gospel,  thus  do. 

4.  Let  every  Apostle  who  comes  to  you  be  received  as  the  Lord. 

5.  He  shall  remain  one  day,  and  if  there  be  need,  another  day 
also ;  but  if  he  remain  three  days,  he  is  a  false  prophet. 


THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE  APOSTLES.      69 

6.  And  when  the  Apostle  cometh  forth,  let  him  not  receive 
anything  except  bread  until  he  go  to  rest ;  if  he  ask  for  money, 
he  is  a  false  prophet. 

7.  And  every  prophet  that  speaketh  in  the  Spirit  ye  shall  not 
try  nor  doubt :  for  every  sin  shall  be  forgiven,  but  this  sin  shall 
not  be  forgiven. 

8.  Not  every  one  that  speaketh  in  the  Spirit  is  a  prophet,  but 
only  if  he  have  the  character  of  the  Lord.  By  their  characters  a 
false  prophet  and  a  true  prophet  shall  be  known. 

9.  And  every  prophet  that  ordaineth  a  table  in  the  Spirit  shall 
not  eat  thereof  :  if  otherwise,  he  is  a  false  prophet. 

10.  And  every  prophet  that  teacheth  the  truth,  if  he  do  not 
what  he  teacheth,  is  a  false  prophet. 

11.  And  every  approved  true  prophet  sacrificing  at  the  earthly 
mystery  of  the  Church,  but  not  teaching  to  do  what  he  himself 
doeth,  shall  not  be  judged  of  you  :  for  he  hath  his  judgment  with 
God.      For  so  also  did  the  ancient  prophets. 

12.  And  whosoever  shall  say  in  the  Spirit,  Give  me  money  or 
any  other  things,  ye  shall  not  hear  him.  But  if  he  tell  you  to 
give  in  the  matter  of  others  that  have  need,  let  no  one  judge 
him. 

Chapter  12. 

1.  Let  every  one  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  be 
received  ;  and  then,  when  ye  have  proved  him,  ye  shall  know 
him.  For  ye  have  the  power  of  discernment  on  the  right  and  on 
the  left. 

2.  If  he  that  cometh  be  a  wayfarer,  assist  him  so  far  as  ye  are 
able.  But  he  shall  not  abide  with  you  more  than  two  days,  or 
three,  if  there  be  a  necessity. 

3.  But  if  he  be  willing  to  settle  among  you,  being  a  craftsman, 
let  him  work  and  eat. 

4.  But  if  he  have  no  handicraft,  consider  in  your  wisdom  how 
he  may  not  live  with  you  as  a  Christian  in  idleness. 

5.  But  if  he  will  not  do  this,  he  is  a  trafficker  in  Christ. 
Beware  of  such. 

ClI  AFTER  13. 

1.  Every  true  prophet  who  is  willing  to  settle  among  you  is 
worthy  of  his  maintenance. 

2.  So  also  a  true  teacher  is  worthy,  even  as  the  labourer,  of 
his  maintenance. 


70  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

3.  Therefore  all  the  firstfruits  of  the  produce  of  the  wine- 
press and  the  threshing-floor,  and  of  the  oxen  and  of  the  sheep, 
thou  shalt  take  and  give  to  the  prophets.  For  they  are  your 
high-priests. 

4.  But  if  ye  have  no  prophet,  give  it  to  the  poor. 

5.  If  thou  makest  a  feast,  take  the  firstfruits  and  give  it 
according  to  the  commandment. 

6.  Likewise  when  thou  openest  a  cask  of  wine  or  oil,  take  the 
firstfruits  and  give  it  to  the  prophets. 

7.  Of  money  also  and  of  raiment,  and  of  every  possession  take 
the  firstfruits,  and  as  it  shall  seem  good  to  thee,  give  it  according 
to  the  commandment. 

CiiArTER   14. 

1.  On  the  Lord's  day  of  the  Lord  ^  gather  together  and  break 
bread  and  offer  the  Eucharist,  having  first  confessed  your  trans- 
gressions, that  your  sacrifice  ma}^  be  pure. 

2.  Let  every  one  that  hath  a  dispute  with  his  friend  not  come 
together  with  you,  until  they  be  reconciled,  that  your  sacrifice  be 
not  profaned. 

3.  For  this  is  the  (word)  spoken  by  the  Lord  :  "  In  every  place 
and  time  to  bring  to  Me  a  pure  sacrifice ;  for  I  am  a  great  King, 
saith  the  Lord,  and  My  Name  is  wonderful  among  the  Gentiles." 

Chapter  15. 

1.  Appoint  to  yourselves  bishops  and  deacons  worthy  of  the 
Lord,  meek  men  and  without  covetousness,  true  and  approved. 
For  they  also  minister  to  you  the  ministry  (divine  service)  of  the 
prophets  and  teachers. 

2.  Do  not  therefore  despise  them  ;  for  they  are  those  who  are 
honoured  among  you  with  the  prophets  and  teachers. 

3.  Reprove  one  another  not  in  wrath  but  in  peace,  as  ye  have 
it  in  the  Gospel :  and  to  every  one  that  misbehaveth  against 
another  let  no  one  speak,  nor  let  him  be  heard  by  you,  until  he 
repent. 

4.  Your  prayers  and  your  alms  and  all  your  actions  so  perform 
ye  as  ye  have  it  (commanded)  in  the  Gospel  of  the  Lord. 

^  i]  KvpiaKT]  Tov  Kvplov,  a  curious  expresi^ion. 


THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE  APOSTLES.      71 


Part  TV. — Chapter  16. 

1.  Watch  for  your  life.  Let  not  your  lamps  be  quenched,  nor 
your  loins  be  loosed,  but  be  ye  ready :  for  we  know  not  the  hour 
in  which  our  Lord  cometh. 

2.  Gather  yourselves  together  frequently,  seeking  the  things 
that  are  fitting  for  your  souls ;  for  the  whole  time  of  your  faith 
shall  not  profit  you  unless  ye  be  made  perfect  in  the  last  time. 

3.  For  in  the  last  days  shall  the  false  prophets  and  corrupters 
be  multiplied,  and  the  sheep  shall  be  turned  into  wolves,  and  love 
shall  be  turned  iuto  hate. 

4.  For  by  the  increase  of  iniquity  men  shall  hate  and  persecute 
and  betray  each  other ;  and  then  shall  the  deceiver  of  the  world 
appear  as  the  Son  of  God,  and  shall  do  signs  and  w^onders,  and 
the  earth  shall  be  given  over  into  his  hands,  and  he  shall  do  un- 
lawful things  which  have  never  happened  since  the  world  began. 

5.  Then  shall  come  the  judgment  of  men  into  the  fiery  trial, 
and  many  shall  be  offended  and  perish.  But  those  who  remain 
in  their  faith  shall  be  saved  from  the  power  of  the  curse.  ^ 

6.  And  then  shall  the  signs  of  the  truth  appear  :  first,  the  sign 
of  the  unrolling  of  heaven,-  then  the  sign  of  the  voice  of  the 
trumpet,  and  the  third  (shall  be)  the  resurrection  of  the  dead. 

7.  Yet  not  of  all  the  dead;  but  as  it  was  said.  "The  Lord 
shall  come,  and  all  His  saints  with  Him." 

8.  Then  shall  the  world  see  the  Lord  coming  above  the  clouds 
of  heaven. 

^  Others  render  :  "by  the  Curse  Himself,''  i.e.,  Christ,  who  was  made  a 
curse  for  us. 

-  Others  render  :  "  the  flying  forth  in  heaven,"  sc,  of  those  who  are  alive 
at  the  time.  See  i  Thess.  iv.  17.  But  this  use  of  the  word  iKTreraais  is 
doubtful.     Others  interpret  it  of  the  Sign  of  the  Cross. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

IGNATIUS  (a.d.  40-115?). 

Of  all  the  early  heroes  of  the  Church,  there  is  perhaps  none 
who  excites  so  much  interest  as  Ig'natius ;  there  is  certainly 
none  whose  writings  have  been  the  subject  of  such  keen  and 
long-continued  controversy.  He  follows  Clement  at  an  in- 
terval of  about  twenty  years,  but  those  were  years  of  rapid 
progress,  and,  when  we  compare  or  contrast  the  two  men  and 
their  writings,  it  is  hard  to  realise  that  they  are  separated  by 
less  than  a  generation. 

Ignatius  is  often  spoken  of  j^re-eminently  as  "  the  Martyr," 
by  which  title  is  indicated  not  indeed  his  only,  but  his  most 
conspicuous  claim  to  the  veneration  of  Christendom.  It  is 
not  that  his  readiness,  or  rather  his  eager  impatience  to  meet 
a  cruel  death,  may  not  easily  be  paralleled  in  the  lives  of 
other  worthies.  But  it  is  in  the  opportuneness,  in  the  celebrity 
of  his  death,  in  the  dramatic  publicity  of  his  progress  as  a 
condemned  criminal  through  some  of  the  most  renowned 
cities  of  the  Empire,  in  his  clear  perception  that  by  dying  he 
would  best  serve  the  cause  he  loved,  in  his  unshakable  re- 
solve to  die,  that  he  reveals  the  lineaments  of  a  hero,  and 
attains  a  position  in  the  ranks  of  martyrdom  second  only  to 
that  of  the  Proto-martyr  himself.  Yet  strange  to  say,  in  spite 
of  his  fame,  to  which  even  Pagan  writers  testify,  the  circum- 
stances that  precede  his  death  are  almost  all  we  really  know 
about  him.  His  previous  life  is  an  utter  blank.  His  death 
is  described  by  anticipation,  but  nowhere  recorded.  The 
few  allusions  to  him  in  trustworthy  writers  of  later  date  do 
nothing  to  supplement  the  deficiencies  of  contemporary  his- 
tory. The  earliest  mention  of  him  occurs  in  the  Epistle  of 
Polycarp,  written  to  the  Philippian  Church  about  the  time 


IGNATIUS.  73 

of  his  martyrdom  ;  but  it  is  very  slight.  Origen  twice  men- 
tions him  by  name,  and  quotes  three  short  passages  from  the 
letters.  Irenseus,  a.d.  i8o,  refers  to  one  well-known  passage. 
The  Apostolical  Constitutions,  written  in  the  fourth  century, 
speak  of  him  as  Bishop  of  Antioch.  Eusebius,  to  whom  we 
are  indebted  for  the  first  connected  notice  of  his  writings, 
besides  considerable  quotations,  supplies  a  catalogue  of  the 
letters  which  in  his  opinion  are  correctly  ascribed  to  the 
saint,  which  is  of  the  first  imj^ortance  to  the  literary  his- 
torian. If  we  could  be  quite  certain  that  Lucian's  Satire  on 
the  Death  of  Peregrinus  (written  about  A.D.  165)  alluded 
to  the  history  of  Ignatius,  we  should  have  an  immensely 
strong  corroboration  of  the  truth  of  the  letters  themselves 
and  the  tradition  which  gathered  round  them.  But  though 
probability  is  strongly  in  favour  of  the  identification  of  Pere- 
grinus with  Ignatius,  it  cannot  be  said  to  be  certainly  proved. 

After  Eusebius,  we  find  Athanasius,  in  a  treatise  written 
probably  in  a.d.  359,  alluding  to  him  by  name,  and  quoting 
a  passage  from  one  of  the  letters.  The  subsequent  authors 
who  profess  to  supply  information  about  him  mostly  either 
borrow,  with  amplifications,  from  Eusebius  or  Origen,  or  else 
allow  themselves,  in  the  absence  of  known  facts,  a  free  lati- 
tude of  imagination ;  to  this  latter  class  belong  the  Acts  of 
Martyrdom  known  as  the  Antiochene  and  Roman.  These 
were  long  supposed  to  convey  authentic  details  of  the  death 
and  burial  of  the  saint,  but  a  more  discerning  age  justly 
rejects  their  testimony  as  absolutely  worthless. 

All  that  we  can  state  with  any  approach  to  certainty  is  as 
follows.  Ignatius  was  a  native  of  the  East,  probably  of  Syria, 
possibly  of  Antioch.  From  the  expression  ''an  untimely 
birth,"  which,  like  S.  Paul,  he  applies  to  himself,  we  should 
infer  that  he  was  not  born  of  Christian  parents,  but  was 
converted  in  adult  life,  most  probably  by  some  sudden  and 
violent  interj^osition.  Of  his  previous  life  we  have  no  record, 
but  Lightfoot  thinks  his  language  about  himself  implies 
that  he  had  not  been  free  from  the  moral  laxity  which  was 
universal  among  the  Gentile  world.  It  is  at  any  rate  charac- 
terised by  remarkable  self-depreciation,  which  seems  to  be 


74  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

most  easily  explained  by  this  theory,  though,  of  course,  it  does 
not  prove  it. 

He  was  unquestionably  Bishop  of  Antioch  in  Syria  at  the 
time  of  his  condemnation,  but  how  long  he  had  held  this 
office  is  uncertain.  The  earliest  tradition  sj^eaks  of  him  as 
an  apostolic  man,  i.e,,  one  who  had  had  personal  intercourse 
with  one  or  more  of  the  Apostles.  The  Apostolical  Constitu- 
tions represent  him  as  having  been  appointed  bishop  by 
S.  Paul,  but  this  statement  is  not  entitled  to  much  credit. 
Neither  the  date  of  his  appointment  nor  that  of  his  martyr- 
dom is  known ;  but  the  latter  may  with  great  probability 
be  placed  within  a  few  years  of  A.D.  no,  before  or  after. 
As  there  are  good  grounds  for  belie viug  that  he  was  ad- 
vanced in  life  when  he  met  his  death,  we  may  suppose  him 
to  have  been  born  somewhere  about  A.D.  40 :  in  which  case 
he  may  as  a  young  man  have  seen  S.  Peter  and  S.  Paul  (for 
the  latter  of  whom  he  has  the  veneration  of  a  kindred  though 
lesser  spirit) ;  but  it  is  more  probable  that  his  conversion 
occurred  later  in  life,  and  that,  if  associated  with  any  apostle, 
it  was  with  S.  John,  whom  tradition  represents  as  residing 
at  Ephesus  until  after  the  close  of  the  first  century.  A  late 
tradition  attributes  to  him  the  introduction  of  antiphonal 
singing  in  the  public  worship  of  his  church ;  but  it  is  more 
than  probable  that  this  custom,  which  was  known  to  the  Jews, 
l^revailed  at  or  before  his  time,  not  only  in  Antioch,  but  over 
a  far  wider  sphere.^ 

The  one  and  only  certain  event  of  his  episcopal  life  is  that 
during  some  excitement  or  commotion  at  Antioch,  which 
roused  the  passions  of  the  multitude,  and  disturbed  the  tran- 
quillity of  the  Church,  he  was  accused  before  the  local  tri- 
bunal and  condemned  to  death  for  professing  Christianity. 
For  some  reason  or  other,  probably  the  increasing  demand 
for  victims  in  the  amphitheatre,  he  was  not  executed  at 
Antioch,  but  sent  to  Eome  to  be  thrown  to  the  wild  beasts. 
This  sufficiently  proves  that  he  could  not  have  enjoyed  the 

^  See  Pliny's  letter  to  Trajan,  which  speaks  of  the  Christians  in  Bithynia 
singing  hymns  antiphonally  (the  most  probable  rendering  of  securn  inviccm,) 
to  Christ  as  God. 


IGNATIUS.  75 

privilege  of  Roman  citizenship,  since  in  that  case  he  would,  like 
S.  Paul,  have  had  the  right  of  appeal,  and,  in  the  event  of  the 
previous  sentence  being  confirmed,  would,  like  him,  have  suf- 
fered death  by  the  sword.  He  was  sent  from  Antioch  under 
the  custody  of  a  maniple,  or  company  of  ten  Roman  soldiers. 
The  exact  route  that  he  followed  is  not  quite  certain,  but 
may  be  inferred  with  great  probability  from  various  allusions 
in  his  letters,  as  well  as  from  their  titles.  "It  is  probable  " 
(says  Lightfoot)  "  that  he  took  ship  at  Seleucia,  the  port  of 
Antioch,  and  sailed  to  some  harbour  on  the  Cilician  or  Pam- 
phylian  coast.  From  this  point  he  must  have  travelled  across 
the  continent  of  Asia  Minor.  The  first  place  where  we  find 
traces  of  him  is  near  the  junction  of  the  rivers  Lycus  and 
Maeander,  where  the  road  divides,  the  northern  route  leading 
along  the  valleys  of  the  Cogamus  and  Hermus  via  Phila- 
delphia and  Sardis  to  Smyrna,  the  southern  leading  to  Ephesus 
by  way  of  Tralles  and  Magnesia."  Ignatius  followed  the 
northern  route,  stopping  at  Philadelphia  and  Sardis,  and 
arriving  at  Smyrna,  where  a  longer  halt  was  made.  There 
he  was  welcomed  by  Polycarp  the  Bishop,  and  the  Smyrnean 
Church,  and  was  also  met  by  delegates  from  the  churches 
lying  along  the  southern  route,  who  had,  it  appears,  received 
intimation  of  his  movements,  and  sent  rej)resentatives  to  do 
him  honour.  Ephesus  was  represented  by  its  Bishop  Onesi- 
mus  and  four  other  ofiicials  ;  Magnesia  by  its  Bishop  Damas 
and  three  others ;  Tralles,  being  more  distant,  by  its  Bishop 
Polybius  only.  While  at  Smyrna,  Ignatius  wrote  four  of  his 
extant  letters,  those  to  the  Ephesians,  Magnesians,  Trallians, 
and  Romans.  On  leaving  Smyrna,  he  was  conducted  to  Alex- 
andria Troas,  whither  he  w^as  accompanied  by  Burrhus,  a 
deacon  from  Ephesus,  and  where  he  was  joined  by  two  Chris- 
tians from  his  own  neighbourhood,  named  Philo  and  Rhaius 
Agathopus,  who  were  destined  to  accompany  him  to  Rome 
and  to  share  his  martyrdom.  From  Troas  he  wTote  three 
letters,  two  addressed  to  the  Churches  of  Philadelphia  and 
Smyrna  resj)ectively,  and  the  third  to  Polycarp.  He  re- 
quested these  churches  to  send  emissaries  to  Syria  to  congra- 
tulate the  Church  of  Antioch  on  the  cessation  of  persecution, 


76  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

of  wliicli  fact  he  liad  been  informed  by  his  two  companions. 
''  From  Troas  he  crossed  to  Neapolis,  and  thence  travelled  to 
Philippi.  While  there,  he  desired  the  Philippians  to  send  a 
letter  to  the  brethren  at  Antioch.  Accordingly,  soon  after 
Ignatius'  departure,  they  wrote  to  Polycarj^,  asking  him  to 
convey  the  Syrian  letter  for  them,  and  further  requesting 
him  to  send  them  copies  of  the  letters  Ignatius  had  addressed 
to  him,  together  with  any  other  letters  he  might  have  with 
him.  With  this  request  he  comiDlied.  It  is  not  improbably 
to  this  circumstance  that  we  owe  the  preservation  of  the 
seven  letters  of  Ignatius." 

From  this  point  of  his  journey  Eomewards  we  are  left  to 
conjecture.  When  Polycaip,  some  months  later,  replied  to 
the  Philippians,  he  had  not  heard  of  the  saint's  death,  thouo-h 
he  supposes  the  Philippians,  being  nearer  Rome,  may  have 
later  news.  Of  this  information  we  have  unfortunately  no 
record ;  but  there  is  no  question  that  he  reached  Rome,  pro- 
bably in  October,  and  suffered  death  in  the  Flavian  amphi- 
theatre by  the  teeth  of  wild  beasts,  under  the  administration, 
and  no  doubt  in  the  presence,  of  the  humane  emperor  Trajan. 
A  tradition,  which  can  be  traced  to  the  close  of  the  fourth 
century,  declared  that  his  relics  had  been  translated  from 
Rome  to  Antioch,  where  his  sepulchre  was  shown  in  the 
Christian  cemetery  outside  the  Daphnitic  gate.  In  a  later 
generation,  under  the  younger  Theodosius,  his  supposed  re- 
mains were  removed  with  great  ceremony  into  the  Tych^um, 
or  Temple  of  Fortune,  within  the  city,  which  was  ever  after- 
wards knoTVTi  as  the  Church  of  S.  Ignatius,  and  the  day  of 
his  commemoration  (October  17)  was  altered  to  December 
20,  which,  though  really  the  anniversary  of  his  translation 
to  the  Tycha3um,  became  thenceforth  regarded  as  the  actual 
day  of  his  martyrdom. 

It  should  be  remarked  that  his  name,  Ignatius  or  Egnatius 
(for  both  spellings  occur),  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  two 
Samnite  generals  so  well  known  in  Roman  history,  and  has 
nothing  to  do  with  Ignis,  fire,  but  is  derived,  like  Gnatius, 
from  the  root  gna— seen  in  nascor,  natus.  Lightfoot  gives 
instances  of  the  occurrence  of  this  name  in  the  Eastern  world 


IGNATIUS. 


77 


in  the  early  centuries  after  Christ.  In  all  his  letters,  he  calls 
himself  by  the  additional  name  of  Theophorus,^  which  is 
capable  of  being  interpreted  either  as  the  God-borne  or  the 
God-bearer.  From  the  former  supposition  a  belief  arose  that 
he  was  the  child  whom  Jesus  took  in  His  arms  and  held  up 
to  the  disciples  as  the  type  of  the  Christian  character ;  but 
this  story,  however  attractive,  is,  on  chronological  grounds 
alone,  evidently  impossible.  Moreover,  it  rests  on  a  mistaken 
inter}3retation ;  for  the  word  Theophorus  is  correctly  taken 
in  an  active  sense,  meaning  God-bearer,  and  was  most  likely 
given  to  or  assumed  by  Ignatius  at  the  time  of  his  conversion 
or  baptism.'  At  any  rate,  it  is  used  by  him  not  as  a  title, 
but  merely  as  a  second  name,  just  as  Saul  is  also  called  Paul 
and  Barsabas  Justus  in  the  New  Testament. 

Having  thus  mentioned  at  some  length,  on  account  of 
their  special  interest,  the  ascertained  facts  connected  with 
the  life  and  death  of  Ignatius,  it  remains  to  discuss  briefly 
the  (for  us)  more  important  subject  of  his  literary  remains. 
In  this  department  we  shall  do  little  beyond  recording  the 
results  of  Lightfoot's  monumental  work.  If  we  except  the 
Gospel  of  S.  John,  it  may  be  doubted  whether  any  writings 
have  been  the  occasion  of  arguments  so  conflicting  and 
learning  so  multifarious. 

The  first  point  we  observe  is  that  Eusebius,  our  chief 
authority,  assigns  to  Ignatius  seven  epistles,  which  were  ex- 
tant in  his  day,  and  which  he  evidently  regarded  as  genuine. 
He  arranges  them  according  to  the  order  in  which  they  were 
written,  as  follows: — (i)  Written  at  Smyrna:  Ephesians, 
Magnesians,  Trallians,  Eomans;  (2)  written  at  Troas:  Phila- 
delphians,  Smyrneans,  Polycarp.  These  are  called  by  Light- 
foot  the  Epistles  of  the  Middle  Eecension,  and  are  the  same 
which  were  discovered  in  1646  by  Isaac  Voss,  and  are  often 
called  the  Vossian  Epistles.  This,  however,  was  not  the  form  in 
which  Ignatius  was  known  to  the  mediseval  and  early  modern 
world.  Late  in  the  fifteenth  and  beginning  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  thirteen  epistles  bearing  the  name  of  Ignatius  were 
printed,  first  in  Latin  translations  and  then  in  the  original 

^  'lyvdrios  6  Kai  QeoipSpos. 


78  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

Greek,  together  with  a  correspondence  (manifestly  spurious) 
with  S.  John  and  the  Virgin,  existing  in  Latin  only.  This 
latter  was  at  once  discredited.  The  thirteen  letters  which 
existed  both  in  Greek  and  Latin  are  as  follows:  Mary  of 
Cassobola  to  Ignatius,  Ignatius  to  Mary;  Trallians,  Mag- 
nesians,  Tarsians,  Philippians,  Philadelphians,  Smyrneans, 
Poly  carp,  Antiochenes,  Hero,  Ephesians,  and  Eomans.  These 
documents  are  called  by  Lightfoot  the  Long  Kecension.  They 
maintained  their  ground  for  some  time,  though  doubts  were 
entertained  of  their  genuineness  by  several  scholars,  partly 
on  account  of  certain  anachronisms  and  other  difficulties,  and 
partly  because  they  included  six  which  did  not  appear  in  the 
catalogue  of  Eusebius,  while  the  text  of  the  other  seven, 
where  it  could  be  compared  with  his  quotations,  differed 
from  his.  The  opinion  gradually  gained  ground  that  an 
earlier  form  of  Ignatius  was  somewhere  to  be  discovered, 
corresponding  to  the  text  which  Eusebius  possessed.  The 
credit  of  making  this  conjecture  a  certainty  is  due  to  Arch- 
bishop Ussher,  who,  judging  from  quotations  of  Ignatius  in 
Eobert  Grostete  of  Lincoln  and  other  early  English  writers 
which  differed  from  the  received  text,  drew  the  conclusion 
that  in  England,  if  anywhere,  the  original  of  these  quotations 
would  be  found.  His  sagacity  was  rewarded  by  the  dis- 
covery in  1644  of  a  Latin  translation  of  Ignatius  among  the 
MSS.  of  Caius  College,  Cambridge,  which  he  affirmed  to 
represent  the  genuine  writings  of  the  Father.  His  arguments 
were  soon  afterwards  confirmed  by  the  publication  by  Voss 
of  the  Medicean  MS.  of  Florence,  in  which,  though  some  of 
the  leaves  had  perished,  a  considerable  proportion  of  the 
seven  epistles  of  Eusebius,  together  with  the  five  others, 
were  still  decipherable,  written  in  Greek,  and  with  a  text 
obviously  representing  the  original  of  the  Cambridge  version. 
This  text  differs  from  that  of  the  Long  Kecension  in  being 
considerably  shorter,  and  free  from  those  obvious  anachron- 
isms which  had  raised  suspicion  against  the  latter,  besides 
omitting  several  passages  which  betrayed  an  author  writing  in 
the  interest  of  the  Roman  supremacy.  It  displayed,  however,  in 
all  its  fulness,  that  advocacy  of  the  Episcopal  form  of  govern- 


IGNATIUS.  79 

ment,  which  had  been  from  the  first  on  the  part  of  Protestant 
critics  the  real  obstacle  of  the  reception  of  the  Ignatian  letters. 
The  genuineness  of  this  text  of  the  seven  epistles,  which 
is  called,  as  we  have  said,  the  Middle  Eecension,  was  assailed 
by  several  writers,  more  especially  by  Daille,  but  not  very 
successfully,  and  defended  among  others  by  Bishop  Pearson. 
The  result  of  a  long  and  somewhat  bitter  controversy  was  the 
all  but  complete  surrender  of  the  longer  recension,  and  the 
somewhat  hesitating  and  partial  acceptance  of  the  shorter. 
Thus  matters  remained  for  a  century  and  a  half.  But  in  1 847 
the  question  entered  on  a  new  phase  through  the  publication  by 
Canon  Cureton,  of  Westminster,  of  the  Syriac  text  of  three 
epistles,  those  to  Polycarp,  to  the  Ephesians  and  the  Romans, 
in  a  still  shorter  form,  which  he  maintained  was  the  true 
original  text  of  the  saint,  the  Vossian  letters,  in  his  opinion, 
representing  an  earlier,  as  the  long  recension  represented  a 
later,  development  of  the  interpolator's  art.  This  theory 
found  a  warm  advocate  in  Bunsen,  and  no  doubt,  could  it 
have  been  proved  tenable,  the  great  a  "priori  obstacle  to  a 
general  acceptance  of  the  letters  as  the  genuine  work  of 
Ignatius  would  have  been  removed,  since  the  Syriac  letters 
contain  few  references  to  Episcopacy.  But  the  criticism  of 
Zahn  and  Lightfoot  has  conclusively  shown  that  the  three 
Curetonian  letters,  as  was  long  ago  affirmed  by  Wordsworth, 
are  merely  an  epitome  of  the  Vossian ;  and  that  the  absence 
of  the  other  four  letters  is  due  not  to  the  epitomiser  being 
ignorant  of  their  existence,  but  to  the  accidental  fact  of  his 
having  come  to  the  end  of  his  parchment.  The  only  ques- 
tions, therefore,  that  call  for  solution  are :  firstly,  the  date 
and  author  of  the  interpolated  recension ;  and  secondly,  the 
genuineness  of  the  Vossian  recension.  Neither  of  these,  per- 
haps, can  be  proved  to  demonstration.  But,  with  regard  to 
the  former,  it  is  sufficiently  probable  that  the  author  of  the 
five  spurious  epistles  and  the  interpolator  of  the  seven  is  one 
and  the  same  person,  and  that  he  wrote  near  the  end  of  the 
fourth  century. 

Zahn's  conjecture  that  he  was  Acacius,  the  successor  of 
Eusebius  at  Caesarea,  is  not  an  unlikely  one ;  but  the  truth 


8o  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

will  probably  always  remain  in  uncertainty.  His  date  is 
inferred  from  three  lines  of  argument — (i)  an  Armenian 
version  from  the  Syriac,  dating  from  the  fifth  century, 
already  contains  the  spurious  epistles  of  the  long  recension, 
together  with  the  seven  Eusebian  ;  (2)  the  interpolator  must 
have  been  familiar  with  Eusebius,  on  whose  history  he  shows 
evident  marks  of  dependence  ;  he  has  also  borrowed  freely 
from  the  Apostolical  Constitutions,  which  date  probably 
from  the  fourth  century ;  (3)  the  historical  and  ecclesiastical 
allusions  in  which  he  differs  from  the  earlier  recension  point 
to  the  latter  part  of  the  same  century. 

With  regard  to  the  other  and  more  important  question, 
whether  the  Vossian  Epistles  are  themselves  genuine,  we  are 
justified  in  asserting  that  they  undoubtedly  represent  the 
Ignatian  text,  as  the  Fathers  from  Eusebius  to  Severus  of 
Antioch  used  it.  It  is  hardly  probable  that  these  credentials 
will  secure  their  complete  acceptance  with  modern  scholars ; 
but  even  those  who,  like  Eenan,  regard  the  greater  number 
of  the  letters  as  a  forgeiy,  are  obliged  to  throw  back  the  time 
of  their  composition  to  the  second  century.  Lightfoot,  repre- 
senting the  steady  and  judicial  attitude  traditional  in  English 
scholarship,  sums  up  the  evidence  on  which  he  decides  in 
their  favour  in  the  following  propositions,  which  are  here 
given  in  an  abbreviated  form  : — 

1.  No  Christian  writings  of  the  second  century,  and  few 
other  writings  of  antiquity,  are  so  well  authenticated.  If 
the  Epistle  of  Polycarp  be  accepted  as  genuine,  the  authen- 
tication is  perfect. 

2.  The  chief  objection  to  the  Epistle  of  Polycarp  is  that  it 
involves  the  acceptance  of  the  Ignatian  Epistles. 

3.  The  Epistle  of  Polycarp  is  exceptionally  well  attested 
by  the  bishop's  friend  and  pupil,  Irenseus. 

4.  All  attempts  to  explain  the  Epistle  of  Polycarp  as  a 
forgery  have  failed. 

5.  Consequently,  as  the  external  testimony  is  so  high,  only 
decidedly  strong  internal  evidence  (such  as  anachronisms) 
should  shake  our  confidence  in  the  epistles. 

6.  But  all  the  supposed  anachronisms  have  vanished  under 


IGNATIUS.  8r 

the  increasing  light  o£  criticism,  e.g.,  the  alleged  allusion  to 
the  Valentinian  doctrine  of  ^ons,^  depends  on  a  false  read- 
ing. The  word  ''  leopard  "  -  has  been  proved  to  have  been 
in  common  use  very  shortly  after  Ignatius.  The  expression 
"  Catholic  Church,"  which  seemed  to  Lipsius  sufficient  by 
itself  to  condemn  the  epistles,  need  create  no  difficulty  at 
all,  if  we  interpret  it  simply  as  "  Universal  "  and  not  as 
"  Orthodox,"  for  the  word  Catholic  is  used  again  and  again 
before  the  time  of  Ignatius  in  connection  with  various 
religious  terms,  though  not  actually  with  ifCKXrjaia  (Church). 

7.  Daille  denies  the  possibility  of  the  prevalence  of  Epis- 
copal government  throughout  Asia  Minor  at  the  beginning 
of  the  second  century.  But  recent  research  has  abundantly 
proved  that  he  is  in  error. 

8.  Again,  the  circumstances  of  the  saint's  journey,  as  given 
in  the  letters  and  by  tradition,  did  not  appear  incredible  to 
people  who  lived  within  a  few  generations  of  his  time.  There 
is  therefore  no  reason  why  they  should  appear  incredible 
to  us. 

9.  Objections  have  been  taken  to  the  type  of  character 
displayed  in  the  epistles  as  having  imperfections  which  we 
should  not  expect  in  an  apostolic  man.  These  objections  it 
is  scarcely  necessary  to  answer. 

10.  The  same  applies  to  the  imperfections  of  his  style,  his 
exaggerations,  instances  of  false  taste,  and  the  like. 

1 1 .  The  careful  student  will  perceive  many  indications  of 
a  very  early  date.  The  types  of  false  doctrine  condemned 
are  substantially  the  same  Judfeo-Gnostic,  mixed  with  Docetic, 
views  which  meet  us  in  the  New  Testament,  and  not  the 
later  successors  of  these.  The  ecclesiastical  developments  are 
by  no  means  those  of  the  Irensean  age :  the  apostolic  succes- 
sion, the  priestly  functions  of  the  clergy,  are  alike  unknown 
to  him.  The  mode  of  dealing  with  the  evangelical  and 
apostolic  documents  is  wholly  different  from  what  we  find  in 
the  next  age. 

12.  Undesigned  coincidences  with  regard  to  the  route  fol- 
lowed by  the  Martyr,  the  geography  of  the  country  through 

1  Magn.  8.  -  Rom.  5. 

i  F 


82  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

which  he  passed,  &c.,  have  been  collected,  and  shown  to  be 
consistent  with  the  tradition. 

13.  The  peculiarities  of  style,  which  are  veiy  striking,  are 
just  such  as  can  be  best  explained  on  the  supposition  that 
the  works  are  genuine. 

14.  No  satisfactory  account  of  the  letters  as  a  later  forgery 
has  ever  been  given.  For  it  may  be  conclusively  shown  that 
they  omit  all  those  topics  which  would  interest  a  later  age. 

Such  are  the  grounds  (briefly  stated)  on  which  Lightfoot 
decides  to  accept  the  seven  Yossian  E]3istles.  In  these,  there- 
fore, we  may  safely  conclude  that  we  possess  the  genuine 
work  of  the  saint,  and  the  most  important  testimony  extant 
to  the  state  of  Church  government  and  doctrine  in  the  East 
during  the  first  quarter  of  the  second  century. 

We  now  turn  from  the  question  of  the  authenticity  of  the 
letters,  to  that  of  their  permanent  interest  and  value  as  works 
of  Church  literature. 

The  long  period  of  nearly  a  century  which  intervenes  be- 
tween the  last  of  the  New  Testament  writings  and  those  of 
Irenseus,  the  first  systematic  ecclesiastical  writer,  was  a  period 
of  rapid  growth.  At  its  commencement  we  are  still  among 
the  ciincibula  of  Christianity :  Apostles  linger  here  and  there, 
giving  that  personal  attestation  to  the  Gospel  message  which 
was  esteemed  so  much  more  weighty  than  written  docu- 
ments. EjDiscojDacy,  if  it  has  been  established  at  all,  is  still  in 
its  infancy ;  probably  confined  to  a  comparatively  small  area 
in  Asia.  The  Old  Testament  alone  is  quoted  under  the  name 
of  Holy  Scripture  :  such  evangelistic  writings  as  were  circu- 
lated were  not  widely  known :  a  few  Epistles  of  S.  Paul  and 
others,  and  certain  Gospels  which  were  by  no  means  yet 
reduced  to  their  final  form :  far  less  was  any  canon  yet  fixed. 

At  the  conclusion  of  this  epoch,  we  see  the  organisation  of 
the  Church  in  all  its  essential  parts  complete.  We  see  not 
only  the  same  Church  order  prevailing  in  all  parts  of  the 
Christian  world,  but  a  well-established  system  of  intercom- 
munication between  the  various  churches,  for  the  express 
purpose  of  maintaining  the  faith  intact,  and  combating  as  it 
arises  each  new  departure  from  primitive  tradition.     We  see 


IGNATIUS.  83 

the  term  Catholic  applied  to  the  Church  and  the  Faith  no 
longer  in  its  vague  popular  sense,  but  in  the  precise  dog- 
matic one  which  it  has  ever  since  borne :  we  see  a  society, 
still  unrecognised  by  law,  still  liable  to  bloody  persecutions, 
increasing  in  numbers  and  confidence  every  day,  thoroughly 
conscious  of  its  strength  and  inspired  by  a  sense  of  its  des- 
tiny, not  laying  the  foundations  of  its  riper  structure  amid 
the  existing  ruins  of  ancient  strongholds,  but  quarrying  in 
the  unbroken  mountain-side  with  the  full  conviction  that 
the  future  belongs  to  itself. 

This  long  and  eventful  period  is  broken  by  but  few  voices. 
At  its  commencement  we  have  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  as  they 
are  called,  Clement,  Ignatius,  Barnabas,  Hermas,  Papias,  and 
a  little  later  Polycarp ;  but  scarce  another  writer  who  has 
left  even  a  fragment  behind.  The  heathen  satirist  Lucian, 
it  is  true,  has  in  several  of  his  treatises  allusions  to  Christian 
customs,  which,  in  the  absence  of  better  information,  we  are 
glad  to  examine,  and  learn  from  them  what  we  can.  But, 
on  the  whole,  it  may  be  questioned  whether  any  period  of 
equal  importance  for  the  human  race  has  been  left  with  so 
few  authentic  records,  and  that  too  at  the  very  meridian 
height  of  the  grandest  ci\dlisation  the  ancient  world  ever 
knew. 

That  this  should  have  been  so  may  well  excite  our  wonder. 
The  causes  are  various.  In  the  first  place,  nearly  all  the  early 
disci]3les  confidently  anticipated  the  speedy  advent  of  Christ 
and  the  destruction  of  the  Eoman  Empire.  Even  after  the 
first  eager  hopes  had  faded  away,  there  was,  as  we  see  from 
Ignatius,  a  settled  conviction  that  the  present  state  of  things 
would  not  last  long.  Under  such  mental  conditions,  the 
practice  of  keeping  written  records  for  the  benefit  of  future 
ages  would  not  suggest  itself,  or,  if  adopted  here  and  there, 
would  not  be  general. 

Moreover,  the  great  majority  of  believers  belonged  to  those 
nationalities  and  classes  which  were  excluded  from  joolitical 
and  municipal  life,  to  which,  therefore,  literary  composition 
was  unfamiliar,  while  anything  in  the  shape  of  monumental 
or  other  permanent  material  records  would,   of  course,  be 


84  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

forbidden  by  the  authorities.  Indeed,  even  writings  would  be 
liable  to  seizure,  and  so  become  a  source  of  peril  to  those 
who  possessed  them. 

The  apostolic  letters  and  evangelical  histories,  which  were 
now  gradually  making  their  way,  and  attaining  to  the  position 
in  which  we  find  them  in  the  time  of  Iren^eus,  as  a  body  of 
authoritative  documents,  bearing  a  similar  relation  to  the 
Christian  religion  that  the  Old  Testament  bore  to  the  Jewish, 
no  doubt  satisfied  for  the  present  the  spiritual  needs  of  the 
churches,  reinforced  as  they  were  by  the  oral  testimony  of 
persons  who  had  conversed  with  Apostles,  and  faithfully 
repeated  the  substance  and  often  the  words  of  their 
teaching. 

What  may  be  called  the  Hebraic  period  of  the  Church's 
literature  was  still  dominant.  There  is  no  sign  in  Clement  or 
Ignatius,  still  less  in  the  other  sub- Apostolic  Fathers,  of  any 
desire  to  incorporate  with  Christianity  the  ideas  of  classical 
culture  or  the  truths  of  philosophy.  There  may,  indeed 
there  must  have  been  a  large  number  of  letters  and  treatises 
written  on  different  points  of  the  faith  as  occasion  arose,  but 
these  have  perished,  partly  from  confiscation  by  the  authori- 
ties, instigated  by  hostile  Jews,  partly  from  their  not  having 
had  sufficient  general  influence  to  secure  their  preservation. 
Hence  the  few  fragments  of  this  intermediate  literature  that 
remain  have  a  peculiar  interest  for  us,  as  forming  practically 
the  only  landmarks  for  our  guidance  during  a  period  when 
almost  all  the  great  institutions  of  early  Christianity  were 
matured.  By  far  the  most  remarkable  of  these  fragments 
are  the  seven  letters  which  bear  the  name  of  Ignatius,  both 
from  their  intrinsic  value  as  evidencing  the  condition  of  the 
churches  of  Asia  as  to  doctrine  and  discipline,  and  also  as 
vivid  portraits  of  a  strikingly  vigorous  and  original  per- 
sonality. It  would  be  difficult  for  any  one  at  all  interested 
in  Christian  history  to  treat  these  letters  with  indifference. 
They  are  of  the  aggressive  type  that  almost  challenges 
criticism.  No  greater  contrast  to  the  calm,  conciliatory 
and  cultured  tone  of  Clement  can  be  imagined  than  these 
unskilful  but  impassioned  utterances,  which  betray  a  nature 


I(;natius.  85 

ardent,  affectionate,  strong-willed,  perhaps  imperious,  not 
moving  easily  amidst  ideas,  but  deeply  possessed  with  those 
it  has  acquired,  and  able  to  guard  them  against  the  assaults, 
insidious  or  violent,  of  all  opposing  influences.  This  strong 
grasp  on  ideas,  in  a  mind  evidently  without  literary  training, 
shows  itself  in  many  short,  pithy,  sententious  phrases,  almost 
proverbial  in  their  brevity.  It  is  also  accompanied  naturally 
by  a  certain  exaggeration  of  language  and  a  frequent  mixture 
of  strained  and  often  incongruous  metaphors,  which  have  been 
quoted  as  marks  of  spuriousness,  but  when  candidly  weighed 
tell  quite  the  other  way.  If  we  compare  the  style  of  the 
letters  of  the  Long  Recension  with  that  of  the  genuine 
Ignatius,  we  are  conscious,  even  where  the  language  is  most 
nearly  the  same,  of  a  subtle  and  pervading  difference,  none 
the  less  important  because  hard  to  define,  which  distinguishes 
the  trained  writer  from  the  untrained.  Simple  the  style  of 
the  letters  is  not,  both  thoughts  and  language  requiring  close 
attention  before  the  reader  can  be  sure  he  enters  into  them. 
But  though  written  in  haste,  perhaps  under  the  eye  of  an 
impatient  soldier,  the  want  of  finish  does  not  affect  the 
thoughts,  which  are  presented  with  singular  j^ower,  and  recur 
unmodified  in  nearly  every  epistle. 

The  cardinal  conception  on  which  all  else  turns  is  the 
reality  of  the  life,  death  and  passion  of  Christ  as  the  Incar- 
nate Son  of  God.  It  is  opposed  to  the  Docetic  view  so  pre- 
valent in  early  times,  so  unintelligible  to  ourselves,  that  the 
humanity  and,  above  all,  the  sufferings  of  Christ  were  merely 
apparent.  To  Ignatius  the  passion  of  Christ  is  the  quintes- 
sence of  Christian  doctrine.  Properly  understood,  it  includes 
the  theory  of  His  Divine  Personality  and  His  power  to  save 
mankind.  Publicly  confessed,  it  is  the  best  safeguard  against 
the  innovations  of  heretical  speculation. 

The  other  idea,  emphasised  by  Ignatius  with  continual  and 
almost  wearisome  reiteration,  is  the  great  practical  doctrine 
of  the  supremacy  of  the  Bishop  in  each  church,  and  the  duty 
of  implicit  obedience  to  him.  The  prominence  which  is  ac- 
corded to  this  doctrine  has  always  been  the  great  stumbling- 
block   in   the  way  of  the    acknowledgment  of  the  letters. 


86  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

The  part  it  plays  in  them  may  be  judged  from  the  follo^ng 
passages : — 

"  '  Ye  are  attached  to  3-our  Bishop  as  closely  as  the  Chmx*h  is  to 
Christ,  and  as  Christ  is  to  God  the  Father '  (Eph.  5 ).  '  Every  one 
whom  the  Master  of  the  Household  sendeth  to  be  steward  over 
His  own  house,  we  ought  so  to  receive  as  Him  that  sent  him. 
Plainly,  therefore,  we  ought  so  to  regard  the  Bishop  as  the  Lord 
Himself '  (Eph.  6).  '  T  advise  you,  be  zealous  to  do  all  things  in 
godly  concord,  the  Bishop  presiding  after  the  likeness  of  God, 
and  the  presbyters  after  the  likeness  of  the  council  of  the 
Apostles,  with  the  deacons  also,  who  are  most  dear  to  me,  having 
been  entrusted  with  the  diaconate  of  Jesus  Christ'  (Magn.  6). 
'  Be  subject  to  your  Bishop  and  to  one  another,  as  Jesus  Christ 
to  the  Father,  and  the  Apostles  to  Christ  and  the  Father'  (Magn. 
13).  '  It  is  therefore  necessary  that  ye  should  do  nothing  with- 
out the  Bishop :  but  be  ye  obedient  also  to  the  presbytery  as  to 
the  Apostles  of  Jesus  Christ ;  .  .  .  and  those  who  are  deacons 
must  please  all  men  {i.e.,  the  laity)  in  all  ways'  (Trail.  2).  'Let 
all  men  respect  the  deacons  as  Jesus  Christ,  even  as  they  should 
respect  the  Bishop  as  being  a  type  of  the  Father,  and  the  pres- 
byters as  the  council  of  God  and  as  the  college  of  Apostles ' 
(Trail.  3).  'It  is  not  lawful  without  the  Bishop  to  baptize  or 
hold  a  love-feast'  (Sm.  8).  'It  is  well  to  know  God  and  the 
Bishop.  He  that  honoureth  the  Bishop  is  honoured  of  God.  He 
that  doeth  ought  without  the  knowledge  of  the  Bishop  serveth 
the  devil'  (Sm.  9).  'As  many  as  are  God's  and  Jesus  Christ's, 
these  are  on  the  side  of  the  Bishop.  ...  Be  not  deceived.  If 
any  follow  a  maker  of  schism,  he  doth  not  inherit  the  kingdom 
of  God'"  (Phil.  3). 

Passages  like  these,  which  are  found  in  all  th^  letters 
except  that  to  the  Eomans,  sufficiently  prove  the  high  con- 
ception the  writer  held  of  the  Episcopal  office.  But,  while  we 
admit  that  to  justify  language  like  this  Episcopacy  must  have 
been  already  fully  established  and  its  value  been  proved  by 
experience,  yet  the  references,  when  carefully  considered, 
are  almost  as  remarkable  for  what  they  omit  as  for  what 
they  contain.  In  the  first  place,  there  is  no  trace  of  the  idea 
of  apostolical  succession,  so  dear  to  the  Fathers  of  a  later 
age.     The  Bishop  is  here  in  the  place  of  God  or  Christ  :  the 


IGNATIUS.  87 

presbyters  occupy  the  place  of  the  Apostles.  This  points 
to  a  time  when  the  memory  of  Christ  and  the  Twelve  was 
SLifficiently  recent  to  make  it  the  obvious  parallel  to  the 
position  of  the  Bishop  and  presbytery.  Again,  the  prohibi- 
tion of  baptism,  except  by  the  Bishop,  implies  a  primitive 
state  of  the  Church ;  indeed,  we  know  that  this  prohibition 
was  relaxed  at  an  early  period,  a  result  which  it  is  obvious 
necessity  would  soon  dictate.  Moreover,  there  is  no  mention 
of  Episcopacy  as  a  divine,  nor  even,  if  we  excej)t  one  doubtful 
passage,  as  an  apostolic  ordinance. ^  We  do  not  imply  that 
Ignatius  had  any  doubt  of  this ;  on  the  contrary,  his  arguments 
everywhere  presuppose  it ;  but  it  is  not  brought  forward  in  his 
letters  as  a  cardinal  point.  To  him  the  great  value  of  Episco- 
pacy is  as  a  bond  of  union.  As  the  Church  has  one  faith,  one 
baptism,  one  confession,  this  oneness  can  only  be  practically 
secured  by  having  One  Head,  to  whom  all  questions  are  re- 
ferred, and  all  opinions  bow.  Not  that  the  Bishop  is  absolute. 
The  council  of  the  presbyters  sit  with  him  as  assessors,  and 
often  expressly  share  in  the  responsibility  of  his  acts.  Indeed, 
he  still  remains  a  presbyter,  and  in  a  certain  sense  is  only 
prwucs  inter  jMres,  though  the  tendency  towards  monarchical 
isolation  grew  rapidly.  And  this  view  throws  light  on  the 
omission,  otherwise  so  hard  to  explain,  of  any  salutation  to  the 
Bishop  of  Eome.  It  was  in  the  regions  of  Asia  Minor  that 
the  restless  speculative  temper  of  mind  prevailed  which  re- 
fused to  content  itself  with  the  limits  imposed  by  the  Gospel 
doctrines.  New  ideas  ever  surging  around  and  clamouring 
for  admittance,  kept  the  guardians  of  the  faith  fully  occupied 
in  holding  their  citadel.  A  central  authority  was  clearly 
needed,  and  thus  the  circumstances  of  time  and  place  brought 
out  first  in  Asia  Minor  the  inherent  capabilities  of  that  office, 
which  already  in  the  New  Testament  shows  promise  of  a  fuller 
development  to  come.  But  in  other  parts  of  the  Empire 
there  was  not  the  same  intellectual  ferment.  In  such  cases, 
the  older  constitution  would  continue,  there  being  no  such 
call  for  a  change.     This  we  have  good  reason  for  believing 

^  Viz.,  "  Hold  fast  to  Jesus  Christ,  to  your  Bishop,  and  to  the  ordinances 

of  the  Apostles"  (Trail.  7). 


88  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

was  the  case  at  Pliilippi,  where  Polycarp,  writing  at  the  time 
of  Ignatius'  death,  makes  no  allusion  to  a  Bishop,  but  only  to 
the  council  of  presbyters,  as  the  supreme  authority  ;  and 
such  may  well  have  been  the  case  at  Eome,  a  church  which 
in  the  early  days  was  conspicuously  free  from  heresy,  and 
the  bishops  of  which,  though  we  have  their  names,  do  not 
appear  to  have  been  distinguished  by  any  great  difference  of 
rank  or  power  from  their  brother-presbyters.  The  impro- 
bability of  a  developed  Episcopal  government  at  so  early  a 
date,  then,  becomes  greatly  lessened,  if  we  adopt  Lightfoot's 
view,  that  this  development  was  local,  not  universal ;  origi- 
nating at  or  near  Ephesus,  where  the  last  of  the  Apostles  had 
probably  filled  the  office  himself,  and  spreading  rapidly  from 
its  striking  adaptability  to  the  needs  of  the  time  ;  but  not 
for  some  time  transcending  the  limits  of  Western  Asia,  the 
European  churches  being  either  governed,  like  Philippi,  by  a 
council  of  presbyters  or  by  a  bishop  acting  jointly  with  such 
a  council,  but  without  separate  prerogative.  Where  all  is 
so  uncertain,  we  can  at  best  estimate  probabilities.  But  the 
acceptance  of  the  seven  letters  as  genuine  necessitates  the 
acceptance  of  Asiatic  Episcopacy  in  the  monarchical  sense  as 
a  form  of  polity  existing  already  in  the  second  century,  and 
dating  at  least  from  the  closing  years  of  the  first. 

Passing  now  to  other  points  of  interest  in  the  Ignatian 
epistles,  let  us  note  his  theological  position  considered  with 
reference  to  the  orthodoxy  of  a  more  dogmatic  age.  There 
is  no  doubt  that  the  spirit  of  his  teaching  is  in  complete 
accordance  with  that  of  the  Nicene  Creed  ;  but  several  ex- 
pressions are  used  by  him,  which  might  be  misunderstood  by 
those  who  were  trained  in  a  stricter  phraseology.  When 
found  in  the  inspired  writings,  such  expressions  are  subjected 
to  canons  of  criticism  which  brings  them  into  harmony  with 
what  is  believed  to  be  the  general  sense  of  Scripture,  but  in 
a  few  brief  letters  of  a  single  writer  this  process  is  not  so 
easy  to  apply.  Such  are  the  expressions  "  generate  and 
ingenerate,"!  applied  to  the  Son;  "the  word  (of  the  Father) 

^  yevvTiTos  a-ytvvfjTos  (Eph.  7.)  These  terms  are  not  in  strict  accordance 
with  later  dogma.     Christ   is  always   yevprjTos   never    dyevurjTos ;    always 


IGNATIUS.  89 

proceeding  from  silence,"^  wliicli  was  so  liable  to  misinter- 
pretation that  it  was  cliangecl  by  the  interpolator  to  "  the 
eternal  Word  not  proceeding  from  silence  ;  "  the  absence  of 
any  distinct  formulation  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  of 
the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son,  and  of  His  consub- 
stantiality  with  the  Father.  But  this  want  of  precision  of 
language  is  in  truth  valuable  testimony  to  an  early  date,  and 
is  compensated  for  by  the  very  clear  enunciation  of  those 
cardinal  truths  which  contemporary  heresies  obscured.  The 
early  form  of  Docetism,  which  allied  itself  with  Jewish 
notions  of  angelology,  emanations  and  the  like,  and  the 
inculcation  of  Jewish  observances,  is  stated  and  combated 
with  signal  force  ;  thus  leading  us  to  a  time  not  far  removed 
from  the  apostolic  denunciations  of  similar  views  found  in  S. 
Paul  and  S.  John.^  It  would  be  difficult  for  any  theologian 
to  have  a  greater  horror  of  heretical  teaching  than  Ignatius 
evinces  in  all  his  letters.  He  calls  heretics  the  herbage  of 
the  devil,  as  contrasted  with  God's  planting,  which  is  the 
orthodox  Church,  and  utters  the  strongest  warnings  to  those 
churches  which  need  them,  against  allowing  themselves  to  be 
contaminated  by  heresy. 

In  conclusion,  we  will  notice  some  of  the  more  remarkable 
expressions  used  by  this  Father,  as  instances  of  his  compres- 
sion of  thought  and  the  quaintness  of  his  imagery.  Some 
of  them  are  quoted  by  later  writers,  and  have  become  well 
known.  In  the  Ephesians  we  have  the  following:  "Having 
been  kindled  into  flame  by  the  blood  of  God,"  i.e.,  by  the 
power  of  a  true  belief  in  the  Passion,  or  perhaps  by  the  gift 
of  the  Spirit  in  baptism  :^"  And  hidden  from  the  Prince  of 
this  world  w^ere  the  virginity  of  Mary,  and  her  child-bearing, 
and  likewise  also  the  death  of  the  Lord,  three  mysteries  to 
be  cried  aloud,  which  were  wrought  in  the  silence  of  God."  * 

dyePT^Tos  (uncreated)  never  yevrjTos.  But  the  gist  of  the  distinction  between 
these  two  words  was  j^robably  not  clearly  seized  by  Ignatius. 

^  Magn.  8.  Sige  (silence)  was  the  consort  of  Bythus,  the  Supreme  Being 
of  Valentinus. 

-  Allusions  to  these  views  occur  in  the  Epistles  to  the  Colossians, 
Timothy  and  Titus  ;  in  the  Revelation,  and  probably  in  the  first  and 
second  Epistles  of  S.  John.  -^  Eph.  i.  •*  Eph,  19. 


90  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

Again :  "  The  fitly  wreathed  spiritual  circlet  of  your  presby- 
tery." ^  Again:  "  If  ye  be  silent  (and  let  me  die),  I  shall  be  a 
word  of  God  ;  but  if  ye  love  my  flesh,  I  shall  be  but  a  voice."  ^ 
Here  the  interpolator,  shrinking  from  the  boldness  of  the 
expression,  has  altered  it  to  "I  shall  be  of  God."  "Nothing 
visible  is  good,"  ^  quoted  by  Origen.  But  the  best  known  of 
all  his  utterances  is  found  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans,  '•'  I 
am  the  wheat  of  God,  and  am  ground  by  the  teeth  of  wild 
beasts,  that  I  may  be  found  pure  bread."  **  This,  again,  is 
quoted  by  several  of  the  Fathers. 

Another  saying  is  often  referred  to  for  its  beauty,  "  My 
love  has  been  crucified,"  ^  meaning  Jesus ;  but,  although  taken 
in  this  sense  as  early  as  Origen,  and  accepted  by  many  after 
him,  the  word  rendered  love  (e/jw?)  cannot  be  used  in  a 
spiritual  sense,  but  must  refer  to  earthly  passion.  The 
sentence  therefore  should  be  translated,  "  My  earthly  desires 
are  crucified,"  evidently  a  reminiscence  of  S.  Paul's  "  Crucify 
the  flesh  with  the  affections  and  lusts." 

A  writer  whose  position  led  him  to  deal  with  heresies  so 
subtle  as  those  of  the  Docetge,  must  needs  have  acquired 
some  familiarity  with  philosophical  terms.  Accordingly,  we 
are  not  surprised  to  find  a  few  of  them  scattered  here  and 
there ;  ^  but  these  isolated  instances  in  no  way  affect  the 
general  tone  of  the  writer,  which  is  altogether  spiritual,  and 
not  in  any  sense  philosophical.  Indeed,  they  were  probably 
the  common  property  of  educated  people.  The  same  may  be 
said  of  the  Latin  words  used,  exemplarium,  a  pattern,  desertor, 
depositee,  accepta,  the  last  three  technical  military  terms,  with 
which  his  military  guard  had  no  doubt  made  him  very 
familiar. 

Much  more  interest  gathers  round  those  Christian  expres- 
sions which  we  find  in  him  for  the  first  time.  We  are  in- 
debted to  Ignatius  for  no  less  than  three  of  these,  all  of  the 

^  Magn.  13.  -  Rom.  2. 

•^  Rom.  3.  The  Greek  words  are  ovoh  (paivd/xevou  koXov,  which  reads  like 
a  verse  from  a  poet. 

■*  Rom.  4.     See  Is.  xxviii.  28:  "Bread  corn  is  bruised."  ^  Rom.  7. 

''  Such  as  (pL\6v\os,   eVdperos,  (paiuo/xeuou,  to  dopyrjTov  avrov  Kal  to  aKLVTjTov. 


IGNATIUS.  91 

first  importance.  The  word  "Eucliarist,"  in  the  undoubted 
sense  of  Holy  Communion,  occurs  first  in  his  Epistle  to  the 
Philadelphians.^  Similarly  the  word  "  Christianity  "  ^  is  first 
met  with  in  him,  and  not  only  in  its  external  meaning  as  a 
designation  of  belief,  but  in  its  spiritual  meaning  as  a  state 
of  heart ;  in  which  sense  also  the  word  Christian  occurs : 
"That  I  may  not  only  be  called  a  Christian,  but  also  be 
found  one."  ^  The  expression  "  Catholic  Church  "  also  is  found 
for  the  first  time  in  Ignatius:  "Where  Jesus  Christ  is, 
there  is  the  Catholic  Church."  *  The  meaning  here,  as  also 
in  the  Letter  of  the  Church  of  Smyrna  (written  about  A.D. 
155),  where  it  occurs  three  times,  is  not  Orthodox,  but 
Universal,  implying  extension,  but  not  as  yet  doctrine  or 
unity,  thus  bearing  strong  testimony  to  the  writer's  early 
date. 

The  spiritual  value  of  these  letters  has  always  been  highly 
esteemed.  They  form,  indeed,  no  unworthy  successors  to  the 
epistles  of  the  New  Testament.  The  fervent  piety  of  the 
man,  his  transparent  singleness  of  purpose,  his  unfeigned 
humility,  his  enthusiasm  for  the  Lord  he  served,  are  indeed 
common  to  him  with  many  another  Christian  writer.  But 
the  peculiar  intensity  of  his  style,  cast  in  an  Oriental  mould, 
lavish  in  exaggeration,  yet  totally  free  from  rhetorical  artifice 
or  mere  word-painting,  gives  an  almost  weird  power  to  his 
words  which  the  more  cultivated  periods  of  a  Chrysostom  or 
a  Basil  cannot  attain ;  while  the  calm  strength  of  his  convic- 
tions, the  loftiness  of  his  ideal,  and  his  firm  consciousness 
that  the  Divine  Spirit  is  with  him,  lend  a  solemn  grandeur 
to  his  witness  for  Christ,  which  is  felt  increasingly  with  every 
fresh  perusal.  That  he  was  a  clear-sighted  ruler,  may  be 
inferred  from  his  perception  that  Episcopacy  was  the  surest 
safeguard  against  heresy ;  that  he  was  a  man  of  large  prac- 
tical grasp,  may  be  gathered  from  his  frequent  recommenda- 
tions to  the  various  churches  to  confer  with  one  another,  and 
consult  as  to  their  various  needs  ;  that  he  was  an  acute  judge 
of  character,  is  proved  by  his  selection  of  Polycarp  as  the 

^  Phil,  4.  .  -  X-piaTiaiiafios,  Magn.  10,  Rom.  3. 

'■^  Rom.  3.  ^  Smyr.  8. 


92 


THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 


fittest  man  to  withstand  the  disintegrating  tendencies  of  the 
time.  In  all  these  points  he  stands  out  as  the  able  states- 
man whose  foreseeing  genius  has  sketched  out  for  all  time 
the  great  lines  of  Church  progress,  viz.,  the  threefold  ministry, 
a  right  selection  of  the  chief  pastors,  and  the  necessity  of 
conference  between  the  different  dioceses.  The  subsequent 
development  of  ecclesiastical  organisation,  so  far  as  it  has 
been  healthy  and  fruitful  of  good,  has  followed  substantially 
on  the  lines  indicated  bv  him. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

POLYCARP  (A.D.  69-155?). 

The  last  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  now  claims  our  attention.^ 
Poly  carp  the  Elder,  Bishop  of  Smyrna,  like  Ignatius,  with 
whom  he  is  so  intimately  associated,  is  known  to  ns  chiefly 
through  information  he  has  himself  supplied.  But  he  is 
more  fortunate  than  his  friend  in  having  found  a  right 
worthy  though  unknown  chronicler  to  record  the  circum- 
stances of  his  death.  In  the  case  of  such  men  as  these,  who 
not  only  belonged  to  the  generation  that  had  seen  the 
Apostles,  but  held  high  ^Dositions  in  their  respective  churches, 
no  authentic  detail  of  their  life,  conversation,  and  death  can 
ever  lose  its  interest.  Even  half-visionary  reminiscences  of 
much  inferior  men  are  treasured  by  the  pious  with  scrupulous 
care,  simply  because  they  date  back  to  this  sacred  epoch  ; 
how  much  more  precious  are  the  reflections,  precepts  and 
counsels  of  those  who  were  confessedly  the  first  Christians  of 
their  time  ? 

All  readers  of  Church  history  are  aware  that  at  the  time 
of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  the  Christian  community,  mindful 
of  the  Saviour's  words,^  had  left  the  doomed  city  and  estab- 
lished itself  in  Pella  and  the  surrounding  mountain  strong- 
holds. But  these  small  towns  were  not  fitted  to  be  the 
headquarters  of  a  new  religion.  The  surviving  Apostles  and 
other  leading  members  of  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  sought  a 
home  in  the  populous  cities  of  Proconsular  Asia,  and  Ephesus 
virtually  became  for  a  time  the  centre  of  Christendom. 
S.  John,  S.  Andrew,  S.  Philip,  and  two  other  disciples  of 

^  In  this  chapter,  as  in  the  last,  the  writer  expresses  his  indebtedness 
to  the  Bishop  of  Durham's  researches,  of  which  free  use  has  been  made. 
"  S.  Matt.  xxiv.  16.] 

93 


94  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

Christ,  Aristion  and  John  the  Elder,  are  the  most  celebrated 
names.  These  gathered  around  them  a  circle  of  reverential 
learners,  of  whom,  when  death  had  removed  the  other  leaders, 
S.  John  became  the  venerated  head.  It  was  among  this  circle 
that  Polycarp's  yonth  was  passed.  If  we  accept  as  settled  the 
date  A.D.  155  or  156  for  his  martyrdom,  then,  arguing  from 
his  own  testimony  that  he  had  been  eighty-six  years  a  fol- 
lower of  Christ,  and  intei-preting  it,  as  is  most  natural,  to 
refer  to  his  entire  life,  we  may  assign  his  birth  with  much 
confidence  to  the  year  A.D.  69  or  70.  Irenasus  declares  that 
he  was  appointed  Bishop  of  Smyrna  by  apostles,^  and,  if  this 
statement  be  true,  he  must  have  held  the  office  for  upwards 
of  fifty  years.  The  supposition  is  not  incredible  in  itself, 
nor  inconsistent  with  the  language  either  of  Ignatius  or 
Irenaius. 

We  know^  nothing  of  the  circumstances  of  his  early  life. 
His  name  would  seem  to  imply  a  servile  birth,  but  this  of 
course  would  prove  nothing  as  to  the  nobility  or  meanness 
of  his  original  extraction.  From  his  intimate  knowledge  of 
the  New  Testament,  and  his  almost  unconscious  re23roduction 
of  its  language,  we  willingly  infer  that  he  w^as  born  of  Christian 
parents,  and  this  being  so,  he  would  naturally  count  his 
discipleship  from  his  birth.  At  the  same  time,  there  is  no 
certainty  in  the  matter,  and  some  have  held  that  his  eighty- 
six  years'  service  of  Christ  dates  from  a  conversion  in  early 
manhood. 

Certain  indications  of  familiarity  with  Clement's  Epistle 
have  led  to  the  question  whether  he  had  any  personal  rela- 
tions with  the  Roman  Bishop.  But  to  this  no  answer  can 
be  given.  One  of  his  early  companions,  as  we  know  from 
Irenaeus,^  was  Papias,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Hierapolis,  a 
church  which  was  in  constant  communication  with  that  of 
Smyrna.  With  Ignatius  he  became  acquainted  on  the  occa- 
sion of  the  martyr's  journey  Homeward.  The  eagle  eye  of 
the  saint,  bright  with  the  near  rays  of  another  world,  de- 
tected at  once  in  Poly  carp  a  kindred  spirit,  and  young  though 

'  iii.  3,  4. 
'■^  Ver.  33,  4,  IlaTrtas  .   .   .  'Iwclppov  fiev  aKovaTrjs,   JloXvKapTrov  Be  eraTpos. 


POLYCARP.  95 

he  was,  discerned  in  him  the  man  fittest  of  all  he  had  met  to 
be  the  bulwark  of  sound  doctrine  after  he  was  gone.  From 
Troas  he  thus  writes  to  him,  in  words  which  have  a  prophetic 
ring  :— 

"I  exhort  thee  in  the  grace  wherewith  thou  art  clothed  to 
press  forward  in  thy  race.  Vindicate  thine  office  in  all  diligence 
of  flesh  and  spirit.  .  .  .  Bear  all  men  as  the  Lord  also  beareth 
thee.  .  .  .  Suffer  all  men  in  love,  as  also  thou  doest.  ...  The 
season  require th  thee,  as  pilots  require  wind,  and  a  storm- tost 
mariner  a  haven,  that  it  may  attain  unto  God.  Stand  thou  firm 
as  an  anvil  when  it  is  smitten.  It  is  the  part  of  a  great  athlete  to 
receive  blows  and  conquer.  Be  more  diligent  than  thou  art. 
Mark  the  seasons." 

More  than  fifty  years  (says  Lightfoot)  elapsed  before  the 
athlete  was  crowned.  But  in  the  meantime  he  fulfilled  the 
work  for  which  he  was  thus  singled  out.  His  character  was 
marked  by  modesty  combined  with  tenacity  of  purpose. 
By  an  inflexible  adherence  to  the  doctrine  which  he  had 
received  from  the  Apostles,  continued  through  long  years, 
he  kept  at  bay  the  many  intrusive  forms  of  heresy  which 
clamoured  for  an  entrance  into  the  Church.  A  reverential 
disposition,  which  loved,  above  all  things,  to  accept  a  trust 
from  a  superior  and  defend  it,  and  an  unambitious  steadiness 
of  mind,  equally  proof  against  the  enticements  of  flattery  or 
the  jugglery  of  self-conceit,  made  it  possible  for  him  to  hold 
a  firm  path  himself  and  to  exercise  a  steadying  influence  on 
the  neighbouring  churches.  He  himself  was  surrounded  by 
a  circle  of  disciples,  who  venerated  him  as  he  had  venerated 
his  teacher  of  old.^  Of  these,  Iren^eus  is  by  far  the  most 
celebrated.  Melito,  Bishop  of  Sardis,  Claudius  Ap)ollinaris 
and  Polycrates,  are  also  names  of  note.  Probably  Justin 
Martyr  visited  him,  when  he  came  to  E^ohesus.  A  tradition 
further  asserts  that  Polycarp  sent  out  Andochius,  Benignus 
and  Thyrsus  to  evangelise  Gaul,  but  its  trustworthiness  is 
doubtful. 

^  Ign.  ad  Pol. 
-  See  the  interesting  detail  in  the  letter  of  the  Smyrneans,  chap.  xiii. 


96  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

In  the  closing  years  of  his  life  he  paid  a  \isit  to  Rome,  to 
consult  with  the  Bishop  Anicetus  on  the  vexed  question  of 
the  observance  of  the  Paschal  feast.  Among  the  Asiatic 
churches,  the  custom  had  always  obtained  of  celebrating  the 
Passion  of  our  Lord  on  the  14th  Nisan,  whatever  the  day  of 
the  week,  in  accordance  with  the  Jewish  Passover.  Anicetus, 
however,  alleged  that  since  the  time  of  Xystus (Bishop  of  Rome 
about  A.D.  105)  his  predecessors  had  kept  the  Passion  on  a 
Friday  and  the  feast  of  the  Resurrection  on  a  Sunday.  The 
conference  of  the  two  bishops  did  not  lead  to  any  result,  but 
that  it  was  an  amicable  one  is  shown  by  the  Roman  Bishop 
asking  Poly  carp  to  celebrate  the  Eucharist  for  him,  which  he 
consented  to  do. 

The  date  of  this  visit  is  not  certain,  but  may  with  pro- 
bability be  referred  to  A.D.  154  or  155.  Soon  after  the  return 
of  Poly  carp  to  Smyrna,  an  outbreak  of  persecution  occurred, 
to  which  several  Christians  fell  victims,  and  Polycarp  among 
the  number.  The  story  of  his  death  is  related  in  the  beauti- 
ful letter  of  the  Smyrnean  Church,  which  will  be  noticed  in 
the  subsequent  part  of  this  chapter,  and  which  there  is  good 
reason  for  regarding  as  an  authentic  narrative.  We  there 
learn  that,  as  soon  as  the  persecution  broke  out,  Polycarp 
announced  his  intention  of  remaining  at  his  post,  but  was 
prevailed  upon  by  his  friends  to  withdraw  into  a  place  of 
concealment.  His  retreat  was  discovered  by  a  slave-boy 
under  the  application  of  torture,  and  he  was  brought  back 
by  an  officer  named  Herodes  to  the  stadium,  where  the  people 
had  assembled  to  witness  the  inhuman  exhibitions  of  the 
amphitheatre.  The  proconsul  who  presided  urged  him  to 
swear  by  the  Genius  of  CaBsar,  and  sa}^,  "  Away  with  the 
atheists."  His  reply  is  thus  graphically  described:  Then 
Polycarp,  with  solemn  countenance,  looked  upon  the  whole 
multitude  of  lawless  heathen  that  were  in  the  stadium, 
and  waved  his  hand  to  them;  and  groaning  and  looking 
up  to  heaven,  he  said,  "Away  with  the  atheists."  This 
mode  of  compliance,  however,  as  may  be  supposed,  was 
not  considered  satisfactory.  On  being  further  pressed  to 
revile  Christ,  he   made  the  memorable  answer,   "Fourscore 


POLYCARP. 


97 


and  six  years  have  I  been  His  servant,  and  He  hath  done 
me  no  wrong.     How,  then,  can  I  speak  against  my  King 
who    hath    saved    me  ? "       Persuasion    and    threats   being 
alike   exhausted,    the    people    shouted    that   he    should   be 
thrown  to  the  beasts.     The  proconsul,   however,   explained 
that,  the  sports  being  ended,  he  could  not  comply  with  their 
wish.     They  then  cried  out  that  he  should  be  burned  alive, 
thus  unwittingly  bringing  to  pass  a  vision  which  the  saint 
had  seen  three  days  before,  and  had  then  explained  by  pre- 
dicting that  he  should  suffer  death  by  fire.     A  pyre  was  at 
once  erected,  and  the  sufferer,  declining  the  kind  offices  of 
his  friends,  disrobed,  and  was  bound  to  the  stake.     He  raised 
his  eyes  to  heaven  and  offered  up  a  prayer.     As  soon  as  this 
was  ended,  the  firemen  lighted  the  fire,  "  and,  a  mighty  flame 
flashing  forth,  we  to  whom  it  was  given  to  see,  saw  a  marvel ; 
yea,  and  we  were  preserved  that  we  might  relate  what  hap- 
pened to  the  rest.     The  fire,  making  the  appearance  of  a 
vault,  like  the  sail  of  a  vessel  filled  by  the  wind,  made  a  wall 
round  about  the  body  of  the  martyr,  and  it  was  there  in  the 
midst,  not  like  flesh  burning,  but  like  a  loaf  in  the  oven,  or 
like  gold  and  silver  refined  in  a  furnace.  ...  So  at  length 
the  lawless  men,  seeing  that  his  body  could  not  be  consumed 
by  fire,  ordered  an  executioner  to  go  up  and  stab  him  with 
a  dagger.     And  when  he  had  done  this,  there  came  forth  a 
quantity  of  blood,  so  that  it  extinguished  the  fire ;  and  all 
the  multitude  marvelled  that  there   should  be   so  great  a 
difference    between    the    unbelievers   and   the    elect."     The 
Jews,  who,  according  to  their  wont,  had  been  busy  inciting 
the  malice  of  the  crowd,  persuaded  the  authorities  to  burn 
the  body,  on  the  plea,  ridiculous  in  itself,  but  apparently 
credited  by  the  proconsul,  that  it  might  otherwise  receive 
divine  honours ;  but  the  bones  were  collected  by  his  faithful 
friends  and  de^DOsited  in  a  secure  resting-place.     The  anni- 
versary of  his  death  was  kept  as  a  festival  on  February  23 
in  the  Greek  Church,  and  on  January  26  in  the  Latin. 

If  the  intrinsic  merit  of  Polycarp's  extant  epistle  were  its 
sole  passport  to  fame,  we  may  safely  assert  that  it  would  not 
have  been  now  in  our  hands.     As  literature  it  does  not  rise 

G 


98  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

above  the  level  of  commonplace,  and  tliere  is  nothing  in 
the  arguments  or  exhortations  that  bespeaks  a  great  mind. 
Nevertheless,  this  short  letter  has  had  more  numerous  and 
more  careful  readers  than  many  a  work  of  tenfold  greater 
intellectual  power,  for  it  is  confessedly  the  cardinal  support 
of  the  Ignatian  letters.  If  it  be  accepted,  they  cannot  be 
rejected;  if  it  be  rejected,  they  lack  their  best  and  oldest 
witness.  Thus  it  was  the  Ignatian  controversy  that  first 
shook  the  credit  of  Polycarp,  and  still  lies  behind  the  adverse 
verdict  of  critics.  But  the  authentication  of  his  epistle  is  so 
good,  resting  as  it  does  on  the  testimony  of  his  own  pupil 
Irenaeus,^  that  nothing  short  of  violent  methods  avails  to 
discredit  it.^  There  is  good  ground  for  believing  that  it  was 
read  in  public  in  some  j^arts  of  Asia  as  late  as  Jerome's  day,^ 
and  that  this  practice  had  been  long  in  existence  when  that 
Father  wrote.  The  testimony  of  antiquity  was  wholly  in  its 
favour,  and  internal  grounds  alone  would  justify  us  in  calling 
it  in  question.  The  only  plausible  argument  of  this  kind  is 
based  on  the  expression,  "  whosoever  perverteth  the  oracles 
of  the  Lord  to  (serve)  his  own  lusts,  and  saith  that  there  is 
neither  resurrection  nor  judgment,  is  the  firstborn  of  Satan." 
It  appears  that  Polycarp  used  this  very  expression,  "first- 
born of  Satan,"  when  speaking  of  Marcion.  If,  therefore,  the 
passage  in  question  refers  to  Marcion,  whom  Polycarp  saw 
at  Eome  certainly  not  earlier  than  A.D.  154,  it  is  no  doubt 
an  anachronism.  But  Lightfoot  proves  conclusively  that 
the  charges  made  in  the  passage  are  quite  inapplicable  to 
Marcion,  and  are  properly  applied  to  the  Antinomian  Gnostics 
who  taught  in  Asia  Minor  at  the  beginning  of  the  second 
centuiy.  As  to  the  opprobrious  term  of  condemnation,  a 
writer  is  not  unlikely  to  have  repeated  it  more  than  once 
if  he  felt  the  occasion  called  for  it ;   and  no  more  puerile 

1  Epist.  ad  Florinum,  quoted  by  Eusebius,  H.  E.  v.  20. 

2  Daille  supposes  that  the  passage  which  refers  to  Ignatius  (c.  13)  alone 
is  spurious.  Bunsen  followed  him.  Polycarp's  complete  silence  as  to 
Episcopacy  seemed  to  these  critics  a  sign  of  general  genuineness  ;  but,  as 
Lightfoot  shows,  the  thirteenth  chapter  is  actually  better  authenticated 
than  the  rest.     This  procedure,  therefore,  is  rightly  described  as  violent. 

■**  Vir.  Illustr.  "usque  hodie  legitur,"  c.  17. 


POLYCARP.  99 

argument  can  be  adduced  than  that  a  writer  must  be  restricted 
to  one  use  and  no  more  of  a  pithy  or  sententious  phrase.  Every 
literary  critic  can  recall  among  the  later  works  of  great  poets 
reminiscences  of  their  earlier  expressions,  sometimes  exact, 
sometimes  slightly  varied,  but  cast  in  the  mould  of  earlier 
days  and  easily  recognisable.  Many  such  instances  are  found 
even  in  the  most  careful  writers,  as  Virgil  and  Milton ;  and 
Polycarp,  who  was  hardly  an  author  at  all  in  the  strict  sense 
of  the  word,  wrote  for  use  and  edification,  not  for  literary 
fame. 

The  fact  is,  that  neither  expressions  indicative  of  unauthen- 
ticity  nor  any  suggestions  of  collusion  between  the  writer  of 
Polycarp's  Epistle  and  those  of  Ignatius  can  be  made  good. 
With  the  exception  of  their  identity  of  date  and  of  certain 
contemporary  allusions,  there  are  no  resemblances  of  thought 
or  language,  but  many  striking  differences.  Our  conclusion 
is  that  the  epistle  may  safely  be  accepted  as  what  it  professes 
to  be,  the  genuine  writing  of  Polycarp,  and  as  such  an  in- 
valuable witness  to  the  genuineness  of  the  more  important 
letters  of  Ignatius. 

Closely  connected  with  the  history  of  Polycarp  is  that  of 
the  letter  from  the  Church  of  Smyrna  already  referred  to, 
which  professes  to  give  from  the  hands  of  eye-witnesses  the 
narrative  of  his  martyrdom.  It  is  addressed  to  the  Church 
of  Philomelium,  a  small  town  in  the  interior  of  the  province 
of  Asia,  and  was  written  shortly  after  Polycarp's  death.  Its 
genuineness  has  never  until  quite  recently  been  called  in 
question.  The  great  scholar  Lipsius  is  the  most  eminent  of 
those  who  impugn  it.  He  places  its  composition  in  the  time 
of  the  Decian  persecution,  about  a  century  later  than  its  pro- 
fessed date.  The  chief  argument  he  relies  on  is  the  occurrence 
of  the  expression  "  Catholic  Church  "  four  times  in  the  letter. 
Three  of  the  instances,  however,  use  the  word  in  its  primitive 
sense  of  Universal,  and  one  only  in  the  later  sense  of  Ortho- 
dox. And  Lightfoot  has  shown  that  in  this  case  the  reading 
should,  on  the  authority  of  the  MS.,  be  altered  to  a'^ia  (holy), 
which  thus  meets  the  objection. 

Among  the  more  sceptical  critics,  Eenan  holds  it  to  be 


100  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

genuine,  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  he  is  right.  The 
earliest  direct  testimony  to  the  letter  is  found  in  Eusebius, 
who  quotes  the  greater  j)art  of  it,  and  expressly  intimates 
that  it  is  the  earliest  history  of  a  martyrdom  with  which 
he  was  acquainted.  That  it  was  widely  popular  tvithin 
a  few  years  of  its  composition  is  sufficiently  clear  from 
the  traces  of  imitation  which  we  find  in  the  scarcely  less 
celebrated  Letter  of  the  Gallican  Churches  attributed  by 
many  to  Irenseus,  and  from  the  fact  that  Eusebius  thought 
it  worthy  of  a  place  in  his  "Collection  of  Ancient  Mar- 
tyrdoms." 

If  we  ask  to  whom  the  authorship  is  to  be  referred,  we 
must  be  content  to  confess  our  ignorance.  At  the  conclu- 
sion of  the  letter  there  are  three  supplementary  paragraphs 
which  deal  with  some  features  of  its  literary  history,  (i)  A 
chronological  ajDpendix  giving  particulars  as  to  the  time  of 
the  martyrdom,  by  which  the  date  can  be  fixed  with  the 
same  approximate  precision  as  has  been  attained  on  inde- 
pendent grounds.^  The  appendix  was  almost  certainly 
written  by  the  same  hand  as  the  letter  itself.  (2)  A  com- 
mendatory postscript,  also  thought  by  Lightf  oot  to  be  genuine, 
and  probably  added  by  the  Philomelian  Church.  (3)  A  his- 
tory of  the  transmission  of  the  document,  which  the  same 
critic  believes  to  be  the  work  of  the  unknown  author  who 
wrote  the  spurious  life  of  Polycarp  ascribed  to  Pionius.  If 
this  conjecture  be  just,  the  present  recension  of  the  letter 
dates  from  the  fourth  century,  and  is  therefore  posterior  to 
Eusebius.  Pionius  himself  was  martyred  at  Smyrna  during 
the  Decian  persecution  (about  A.D.  250),  and  was  celebrated, 
among  other  reasons,  for  his  great  reverence  for  Pol3^carp. 
And  the  writer  who  assumed  his  name  in  writing  a  life  of 
Polycarp,  though  obviously  an  untrustworthy  biograjDher, 
seems  in  this  case  to  have  been  content  with  adding  one  or 
two  interpolations  to  an  otherwise  faithfully  preserved  text. 

"  The  Martyrdom  of  Polycarp  "  is  well  worthy  to  rank  as 
the  model  on  which  such  narratives  should  be  based.  Its 
deep  earnestness,   its  transparent  good  faith,  its  touching 

^  See  the  most  instructive  argument  in  Lightf  oot,  vol.  ii.  p.  610  sqq^. 


POLYCARP.  loi 

simplicity  of  language — a  little  homely  sometimes,  but  never 
wanting  in  refinement — have  called  forth  from  critics  of 
widely  different  schools  the  warmest  admiration.  Not  less 
striking  than  these  is  its  moderation  of  tone,  and,  amid  the 
general  craving  for  marvels,  the  slightness  of  its  appeal  to 
the  miraculous.  It  contrasts  most  favourably  in  all  these 
respects  with  the  "Acts  of  Ignatius,"  ^  and  conveys,  what  few 
similar  documents  do,  an  irresistible  impression  of  its  truth. 
We  may  couple  it  with  the  Ignatian  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
and  consider  them  as  forming  together  the  most  interesting 
memorial  of  the  sub-apostolic  age.  The  one,  all  fire  and 
passion,  seems  in  its  impatience  to  devour  the  interval  that 
delays  the  joys  of  martyrdom ;  the  other,  wistful  and  retro- 
spective, scatters  with  tender  hand  sweet  flowers  over  the 
grave  of  the  martyr  who  has  waited  so  long  to  win  his  crown. 
Those  who  are  accustomed  to  treat  this  class  of  narratives 
as  mere  empty  and  untrustworthy  panegyric,  no  doubt  find 
many  examples  which  justify  their  opinion ;  but  if  they 
begin  the  study  of  them  by  reading  this,  the  first  of  the 
series,  they  will  incline  towards  a  more  sympathetic  criticism 
of  documents  emanating  from  zealous  if  uncritical  disciples, 
who  chronicled  from  time  to  time  their  teacher's  or  com- 
panion's "  faithfulness  unto  death." 

^  Written  probably  in  the  fourth  century. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

PA  PI  AS  AND  THE  ASIATIC  ELDERS  (a.d.  70-150?). 

It  has  already  been  remarked  that  the  centre  of  Christendom 
after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  shifted  from  Palestine  to  Asia 
Minor.  Even  before  that  event,  if  we  accept  the  earlier  of 
the  two  dates  for  the  Apocalypse,  the  Asiatic  churches  had 
been  S.  John's  special  care.  And  if  the  later  date  under 
Domitian  be  preferred,  it  is  still  a  fact  worth  remarking  that 
this  great  prophetic  forecast  of  the  Church's  final  conflict  was 
primarily  addressed  not  to  Hebrew  nor  to  Roman  Christians, 
but  to  the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia.  At  what  time  S.  John 
fixed  his  home  in  Asia  we  know  not.  Probably  it  was  not 
long  after  A.D.  70.  Tradition  speaks  of  a  small  band  of 
disciples,  including  also  Andrew  and  Philip,  who  settled  at 
Ephesus.  Of  these  S.  John  became  the  sole  survivor,  his 
life  being  prolonged  until  after  the  accession  of  Trajan 
(a.d.  98).  In  his  later  years  he  is  represented  as  exercising 
a  general  supervision  over  Asiatic  Christendom,  and  in  parti- 
cular as  appointing  bishops  in  the  churches.  The  result  of 
liis  unique  and  long-continued  authority  was  the  formation 
of  what  may  fairly  be  called  a  school  of  theology,  which 
flourished  for  more  than  a  century,  producing  many  famous 
names,  from  Poly  carp  to  Polycrates. 

Not  the  least  distinguished  member  of  this  school  was 
Papias,  Bishop  of  Hierapolis,  whose  name  is  familiar  to  the 
readers  of  modern  controversy  from  its  intimate  connection 
with  the  question  of  the  New  Testament  canon.  The  name 
Papias  is  an  uncommon  one.  It  is  recorded  as  one  of  the 
appellations  of  Zeus,  the  tutelary  deity  of  Hierapolis,  and  so 
seems  to  point  to  a  heathen  origin  ;  but  this  is  only  conjec- 
ture, and  the  circumstances  of  the  saint's  conversion  from 
heathenism,  if  conversion  there  was,  are  altogether  unknown. 


PAPIAS  AND  THE  ASIATIC  ELDERS.  103 

Iren^eus  tells  ns  that  he  was  "  a  hearer  of  John,  and  a 
comrade  of  Polycarp."  1  By  John,  Iren^eus  unquestionably 
means  the  Apostle,  and  by  the  term  "comrade"  he  implies 
fellow-discipleship,  and  consequently  near  equality  of  age. 
From  the  position  assigned  to  Papias  in  Eusebius'  History,^ 
we  should  infer  that  he  was  somewhat  older  than  Polycarp, 
or  at  any  rate,  that  his  death  preceded  Polycarp's.  He  may 
thus  have  been  born  between  60  and  70  A.D.  and  have  died 
about  A.D.  135-150. 

So  far  as  his  date  goes,  then,  he  might  well  have  been  a 
hearer  of  S.  John.  But,  as  in  his  existino:  fraf]fments  he 
makes  no  allusion  to  any  such  intercourse,  and  as  Eusebius, 
in  his  notice  of  Papias,  seems  decidedly  to  dispute  it,  modern 
writers  have  generally  done  the  same,  though,  as  Lightfoot 
has  shown,  on  inconclusive  grounds.  For  Iren^eus,  with 
regard  to  a  matter  of  fact  within  his  own  purview,  is  an 
authority  of  the  highest  order,  and  no  doubt  had  access  to 
sources  of  information  denied  to  Eusebius.  On  the  whole,  it 
seems  best  to  regard  his  discipleship  of  S.  John  as  i^robable, 
though  not  fully  proved. 

Of  his  subsequent  biography  we  know  nothing.  His 
appointment  to  the  see  of  Hierapolis  is  evidence  that  he 
possessed  a  firm  hold  on  Catholic  doctrine  and  displayed 
administrative  gifts.  Accounts  of  his  capacity  differ.  While 
Eusebius  depreciates  him  as  a  man  of  very  mean  intellect,^ 
Irena3us  quotes  him  with  high  respect  as  an  orthodox  writer 
and  trustworthy  channel  of  apostolic  tradition.  This  favour- 
able judgment  was  adopted  in  the  Church.  The  name  of 
Papias  has  always  stood  high,  in  spite  of  the  peculiarity  of 
some  of  his  views. 

His  literary  monument  was  a  work  in  five  books,  entitled, 
"  Exposition  of  the  Oracles  of  the  Lord,"  or  more  exactly, 
"  Of  Dominical  Oracles,"  *  which  was  largely  used  by  Irengeus, 
was  known  to  Eusebius,  was  extant  in  the  time  of  Jerome,  and 

1  Ir.  Hfer.  v.  33,  4. 

-  His  notice  of  Papias  occurs  in  the  thirty-ninth  chapter  of  his  third 
book  ;  that  of  Polycarp  in  his  fourth  book. 

"^  a(p65pa  fxcKpos  top  vovv.  "*  'KvpiaKCov  \oy'iijiv  i^rjyrjaL^  or  e^fjyricreis. 


I04  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

apparently  was  not  lost  until  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth 
century.  The  title  of  this  work  has  been  the  subject  of  much 
discussion.  The  word  i^riyrjatf;  has  been  explained  by  some 
to  mean  "narration,"  instead  of  "interpretation"  or  "expo- 
sition," and  Xojia  to  mean  "  discourses,"  instead  of  "  oracles." 
Lightfoot  has  conclusively  shown  that  both  these  renderings 
are  incorrect.  Whatever  matter  Papias  may  have  brought 
into  the  body  of  his  book,  he  certainly  intended  its  title  to 
imply  "  an  explanation  or  exposition  of  the  sacred  records 
concerning  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  And  the  scanty  frag- 
ments we  possess  correspond  exactly  with  such  a  title.  They 
are  evidently  parts  not  of  a  newly-constructed  evangelical 
narrative,  but  of  a  commentary  on  one  already  existing. 
The  scope  of  the  work  is  in  part  also  deducible  from  Papias' 
own  words,  contained  in  the  preface  or  dedication.  These 
form  one  of  the  many  precious  fragments  of  earlier  literature 
preserved  by  Eusebius,  and  are  as  follows : — 

"But  I  will  not  scruple  also  to  give  a  place  for  you  along  with 
my  interpretations  to  everything  that  I  learnt  carefully  and  re- 
membered carefully  in  time  past  from  the  elders,  guaranteeing  their 
truth.  For,  unlike  the  many,  I  did  not  take  pleasure  in  those  who 
have  so  very  much  to  say,  but  in  those  who  teach  the  truth  :  nor  in 
those  who  relate  foreign  commandments,  but  in  those  who  record 
such  as  were  given  from  the  Lord  to  the  Faith,  and  are  derived 
from  the  Truth  itself.  And  again,  on  any  occasion  when  a  person 
came  in  my  way  who  had  been  a  follower  of  the  elders,  I  would 
inquire  about  the  discourses  of  the  elders — what  was  said  by 
Andrew,  or  by  Peter,  or  by  Philip,  or  by  Thomas  or  James,  or  by 
John  or  Matthew,  or  any  other  of  the  Lord's  disciples,  and  what 
Aristion  and  the  Elder  John  ^  the  disciples  of  the  Lord  say.  For 
T  did  not  think  that  I  could  get  so  much  profit  from  the  contents 
of  books  as  from  the  utterances  of  a  living  and  abiding  voice." 

The  advantage  to  the  modern  student  of  such  a  body  of 
original  tradition  as  Papias  here  implies  that  he  had  amassed 

^  On  the  highly  interesting  question  first  started  by  Eusebius,  whether 
John  the  Elder  and  John  the  Apostle  are  different  persons,  the  reader  is 
referred  to  Lightfoot,  Essays  on  Supernatural  Religion,  It  is  too  compli- 
cated to  be  discussed  here.  The  writer  ventures  to  differ  from  Lightfoot's 
view,  and  believes  that  they  were  the  same  person. 


PAPIAS  AND   THE  ASIATIC  ELDERS.  105 

would  have  been  incalculable,  quite  independently  of  its 
being  (as  it  doubtless  was)  of  unequal  historical  value.  Even 
supposing  the  compiler  to  have  been,  as  Eusebius  declares  he 
was,  a  man  of  limited  intellect  and  poor  judgment,  neverthe- 
less the  possession  of  records  drawn  from  the  living  voice 
instead  of  from  second-hand  narratives  would  have  more 
than  counterbalanced  a  good  deal  of  garrulous  pedantry. 
Lightfoot  has  pointed  out  in  his  Essay  on  Papias  ^  what  a 
multitude  of  interesting  questions  might  be  started  even  from 
the  few  sentences  of  the  prooemium ;  how  many  facts,  bio- 
graphical and  literary,  about  the  Apostles,  now  unhappily 
lost  to  us,  are  suggested  by  his  enumeration  of  just  those 
seven  whose  names  are  connected  with  gospels  canonical  or 
apocryphal.  We  may  well  deplore  the  unkindness  of  Fate, 
or  to  speak  more  truly,  the  narrowness  of  dogmatic  prejudice, 
which  has  suffered  such  a  work  to  perish,  and  preferred  to 
bequeath  us  the  innumerable  dry  dissertations  of  a  later  eru- 
dition, which,  however  theologically  unexceptionable,  retain 
little  or  nothing  of  that  living  voice  which  the  simple  Papias 
had  still  the  sense  to  value.  As  we  have  said,  the  object  he 
set  before  him  was  primarily  to  explain  the  existing  evan- 
gelical narrative  ;  but  no  doubt  it  also  included  the  collection 
of  such  additional  authentic  sayings  or  anecdotes  of  Christ 
and  His  contemporaries  as  would  be  gathered  from  the  "tra- 
dition of  the  elders."  The  term  "  elder,"  it  may  be  remarked, 
is  applied  by  him  to  the  Apostles  as  well  as  to  their  followers, 
and  denotes  not  office,  but  authority  and  antiquity.  His  per- 
sonal intercourse  with  these  elders  was  limited  to  his  early 
life,  probably  before  he  had  any  thought  of  writing  his  book  ; 
and  the  information  he  derived  was  in  consequence  fragmen- 
tary. When  he  set  himself  in  his  later  years  to  collect  a 
systematic  body  of  information,  he  found  it  necessary  to 
supplement  his  personal  reminiscences  by  a  free  use  of 
secondary  evidence. 

The  fragments  of  the  Expositions  of  sufficient  length  to 
enable  us  to  judge  of  their  quality  are  three  in  number. 

1  I  have  borrowed  freel}'  from  Lightfoot,  Essays  on  Supernatural  Keli- 
gion  (5-7). 


io6  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

They  are  eminently  characteristic,  and  their  great  interest 
will  justify  our  insertion  of  them  in  full.  The  first  is  pre- 
served by  Iren^us,!  and  is  a  good  example  of  the  exegetical 
method  of  Papias,  which  was  to  give,  first,  the  saying  of 
Christ  recorded  in  the  written  Gospels ;  secondly,  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  saying ;  thirdly,  the  illustrative  story  derived 
from  oral  tradition,  to  which  the  author  gives  a  place  along 
with  his  interpretation.  It  is  founded  on  the  saying  of  our 
Lord  at  the  Last  Supper,^  "  I  will  not  drink  henceforth  of  this 
fruit  of  the  vine,  until  that  day  when  I  drink  it  new  with 
you  in  My  Father's  Kingdom." 

"  As  the  elders  relate,  who  saw  Jolm  the  disciple  of  the  Lord, 
that  they  had  heard  from  him  how  the  Lord  used  to  teach  con- 
cerning those  times,  and  to  say,  '  The  days  will  come  in  which 
vines  shall  grow  each  having  ten  thousand  shoots,  and  on  each 
shoot  ten  thousand  branches,  and  on  each  branch  ten  thousand 
twigs,  and  on  each  twig  ten  thousand  clusters,  and  on  each 
cluster  ten  thousand  grapes,  and  each  grape,  when  pressed,  shall 
yield  twenty-five  measures  of  wine.  And  when  any  of  the  saints 
shall  have  taken  hold  of  one  of  their  clusters,  another  shall  cry, 
"I  am  a  better  cluster;  take  me,  bless  the  Lord  through  me." 
Likewise  also  a  grain  of  wheat  shall  produce  ten  thousand  heads, 
and  each  head  shall  produce  ten  thousand  grains,  and  each  grain 
shall  yield  ten  pounds  of  fine  white  flour.  And  all  the  other 
fruits  and  seeds  and  grass  shall  follow  the  same  proportion  ;  and 
all  the  beasts  that  feed  on  those  fruits  that  grow  out  of  the  ground 
shall  become  gentle  and  harmonious,  being  subject  to  mankind 
in  all  subjection.'  And  he  added,  saying,  '  Now,  these  things  are 
credible  to  them  that  believe.'  And  when  Judas  the  traitor  did 
not  believe,  and  asked,  '  How  shall  such  growths  be  accomplished 
by  the  Lord  1 '  the  Lord  replied,  '  They  shall  see  who  shall  come 
to  those  times.' " 

One  has  only  to  read  the  above  passage  to  understand  why 
Eusebius  disliked  Papias,  and  only  accords  to  him  such  space 
in  his  history  as  is  consistent  with  the  barest  justice.^     The 

1  Haer.  v.  33,  i  sq.  2  g_  j^jatt.  xxvi.  29. 

^  He  uses  the  phrase  dvayKalojs  vvv  wpocrdrjijo/j.ev,  implying  that  he  feels 
bound  in  accordance  with  his  plan  to  set  down  what  he  has,  but  that  he 
will  not  weary  his  readers  with  more  than  he  can  help  of  such  stuff. 


PAPIAS  AND  THE  ASIATIC  ELDERS.  107 

critical  and  well-regulated  intelligence  of  the  courtier  bishop 
miglit  well  recoil  from  the  coarse  materialism  and  the  scarcely 
less  culpable  credulity  of  such  exegesis  as  this.  If  some  other 
instances  given  by  Eusebius  are  fair  samples  of  the  whole 
work,  it  would  seem  to  have  been  a  good  deal  taken  up  with 
stories  of  marvels,  in  which  the  mythical  and  the  historical 
were  more  or  less  confused.  But  it  was  not  so  much  by 
these  that  Eusebius  was  offended  as  by  the  decided  mille- 
narian  views  which  Pa^^ias,  in  common,  it  must  be  confessed, 
with  a  majority  of  the  early  Fathers,  entertained.  There  is 
reason  to  think  that  his  whole  interpretation  of  the  New 
Testament  was  coloured  by  this  bias.  And,  however  welcome 
his  traditional  authentication  of  it  might  be  to  Irenseus,  who 
was  himself  similarly  inclined,  it  would  constitute  a  grave 
blot  on  the  book  in  an  age  when  millenarian  views  were 
utterly  discredited ;  and  no  doubt  this  was  one  main  ground 
of  the  neglect  into  which  it  fell. 

The  second  fragment,  which,  like  the  first,  was  taken  from 
the  fourth  book,  is  on  the  same  subject,  and  is  preserved  in 
the  same  book  of  Iren^us. 

"As  the  elders  say,  at  that  time  those  who  are  counted 
worthy  of  the  dwelling  in  heaven,  shall  go  thither ;  while  others 
shall  enjoy  the  delights  of  paradise,  and  others  shall  obtain  the 
splendour  of  the  city.  For  everywhere  the  Saviour  shall  be  seen, 
according  as  those  who  see  Him  shall  be  worthy.  And  this  dis- 
tinction of  dwelling  (they  taught)  exists  between  those  who  brought 
forth  a  hundred-fold,  and  those  who  brought  forth  sixty-fold,  and 
those  who  brought  forth  thirty-fold  :  Of  whom  the  first  shall  be 
caught  up  into  heaven,  the  second  shall  abide  in  paradise,  and  the 
third  shall  inhabit  the  city  :  and  it  was  for  this  reason  the  Lord 
had  said  that  in  His  Father's  house  are  many  mansions.  For 
all  things  are  of  God,  who  giveth  to  all  their  fitting  dwelling- 
place." 

Here,  again,  though  we  may  not  think  highly  of  a  theology 
which  insists  on  defining  exactly  what  the  Divine  Speaker 
chose  to  leave  undefined,  and  on  materialising  what  is  evidently 
spiritual,   yet  we  do  not  agree  with  Eusebius  in  regarding 


io8  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

such  fragments  of  the  Church's  golden  age  as  valueless,  but 
rather  as  full  of  religious  interest  and  historical  significance. 
The  third  fragment  is  of  a  wholly  different  character,  and, 
as  bearing  on  the  question  of  the  New  Testament  canon,  is 
thought  worthy  of  preservation  by  Eusebius.  It  refers  to  the 
origin  of  S.  Mark's  Gospel. 

"And  the  Elder  said  this  also:  Mark,  having  become  the 
interpreter  of  Peter,  wrote  down  accurately  everything  that  he 
remembered,  without,  however,  recording  in  order  what  was  either 
said  or  done  by  Christ.  For  neither  did  he  hear  the  Lord,  nor 
did  he  follow  Him  :  but  afterwards,  as  I  said,  attended  Peter, 
who  adapted  his  instructions  to  the  needs  of  his  hearers,  but  had 
no  design  of  giving  a  connected  account  of  the  Lord's  oracles. 
So  then  Mark  made  no  mistake,  while  he  thus  wrote  down  some 
things  as  he  remembered  them ;  for  he  made  it  his  one  care  not 
to  omit  anything  that  he  heard  or  to  set  down  any  false  state- 
ment therein.  .  .  .  Matthew,  indeed,  composed  his  Oracles  in  the 
Hebrew  dialect,  and  each  translated  them  as  he  could." 

As  might  be  supposed,  this  passage  has  been  the  battle- 
ground of  many  opposing  arguments.  Scarce  a  line  or  a 
word  in  it  that  has  not  been  subjected  to  a  lynx-eyed  scrutiny, 
not  always  benevolent.  But  on  the  whole  it  stands  the  for- 
midable test  of  modern  criticism,  and,  in  spite  of  its  awkward 
style,  supplies  the  most  trustworthy  account  we  possess  of 
perhaps  the  oldest  of  the  Gospels. 

Besides  these  three  consecutive  fragments,  there  are  a  few 
veiy  brief  excerpts  from  the  Expositions,  amounting  in  all  to 
some  eight  or  ten  lines,  and  all  with  one  exception  containing 
some  valuable  relic  of  information.  It  is  obvious  to  any 
student  of  Scripture  that  the  utility  of  a  book  like  that  of 
Papias  is  to  a  great  extent  independent  of  the  ability  of  its 
author.  Did  we  possess  it  entire,  we  should  be  well  able  to 
discriminate  between  apocryphal  legends  which  imposed  on 
Papias'  credulity,  and  genuine  traditions,  such  as  the  one  just 
quoted,  which  carry  us  back  to  the  apostolic  period.  We  can 
hardly  doubt,  for  instance,  that  in  his  emphatic  declaration 
of  S.  Mark's  perfect  accuracy,  Papias  is  drawing  not  on  his 


PAPIAS  AND   THE  ASIATIC  ELDERS.  109 

own  conviction,  nor  even  on  the  general  consensus  of  Church 
opinion,  but  is  reporting  the  expressed  judgment  of  an  Apostle, 
and  if  so,  who  could  that  Apostle  be  but  S.  John  himself, 
who  alone  would  be  competent  from  his  age  and  dignity  to 
criticise  the  work  of  a  companion  of  S.  Peter  ? 

It  is,  perhaps,  even  now  within  the  range  of  possibility 
that  the  entire  Expositions  may  yet  be  brought  to  light ;  and 
if  so,  we  may  be  sure  that  some  of  the  burning  questions  as 
to  the  origin  of  the  Gospels  will  be  brought  nearer  solution, 
if  not  finally  set  at  rest. 

In  spite  of  what  he  himself  states  in  his  preface,  much 
misconception  has  prevailed  as  to  the  polemical  object  Papias 
had  in  view.  While  the  author  of  "  Supernatural  Eeligion," 
following  his  German  guides,  regards  him  as  intending  to 
counteract  unauthentic  narratives  by  a  more  correct  one, 
drawn  from  oral  sources,  Lightfoot,  with  infinitely  greater 
probability,  considers  that  he  wrote  against  false  inferences 
from  the  Evangelists'  records  made  by  the  Gnostic  heresiarchs. 
Any  one  who  reads  the  Philosopliumcna  of  Hippolytus  will 
at  once  appreciate  the  necessity  for  some  such  counterblast. 
Whatever  may  be  thought  of  the  intellectual  originality 
of  the  Gnostic  leaders,  the  unsoundness  of  their  exegetical 
method  is  apparent,  and  Papias,  living  in  the  very  time  and 
place  where  these  theories  burst  into  life,  could  have  chosen 
no  better  way  of  counteracting  them  than  by  insisting  on 
the  continuous  stream  of  authentic  interpretation,  of  which, 
though  he  might  have  selected  it  more  carefully,  he  rightly 
estimated  the  value. 

The  fifth  book  of  Iren^eus  is  to  a  great  extent  occupied 
with  such  interpretations,  and  there  is  little  doubt  that  many 
elements  of  Papias'  work  are  embedded  in  it,  though,  in 
accordance  with  the  custom  of  his  age,  he  seldom  acknow- 
ledges his  obligations.  As  has  been  said,  the  early  Church 
writers  were  far  too  full  of  their  subject  to  trouble  them- 
selves about  incurring  the  charge  of  plagiarism.  Whatever 
commended  itself  to  their  judgment  they  inserted,  sometimes 
with  a  reference  to  its  source,  sometimes  without.  It  would  not 
have  occurred  to  them  to  think  they  were  either  defrauding 


no  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

a  predecessor  or  themselves  incurring  the  guilt  of   unfair 
appropriation. 

Besides  Papias,  several  other  "  elders  "  are  referred  to  by 
Iren^eus  as  "  hearers  of  the  Apostles  and  those  who  learned 
from  them."  One  of  these  unnamed  worthies  composed  a 
short  metrical  epigram,  directed  against  the  impostor  Marcus, 
which  the  reader  will  find  in  the  note.^  Its  poetical  merits  must 
be  allowed  to  be  a  minus  quantity ;  nevertheless,  it  is  impor- 
tant as  being  the  earliest  attempt  to  embody  party-criticism 
in  verse,  and  thus  evincing  some  desire  to  make  it  popular 
instead  of  confining  it  within  a  technical  dialect  accessible 
only  to  a  few.  The  scanty  fragments  of  this  group  of  elders 
may  be  found  in  Eouth's  Rdiqidm  sacrcc,  where  the  reader 
will  find  also  much  erudite  and  sensible  criticism. 

^  In  Iren.  H^er.  I.  15,  p.  80. 

ei'owXoTTote  yiapKe  Kai  TepaToaKowe, 
darpoXoyiKTJs  eixTreipe  /cat  fiayLKrjs  re'^i'^s, 
ol  &v  Kparvpecs  ttjs  irXdvrjs  rd  oiddyfMaTa, 
aTj/uLela  oeLKPVs  roh  virb  aou  irXavio/j-evoLS, 
diroaTariKTjs  ovvd/xews  e7%ei/377/iaTa, 
d  (XOL  xopvy^^  <JOS  irarrjp  'Zardv  del 
51  dyyeXiKrjs  hwdp-ews  'Afa^'TjX  iroieiv, 
€XO}v  ce  Trpoopo/Jiov  dvTideov  Travovpyias. 

The  metre  is  crude  and  the  epithets  unparliamentary.     The  use  of  the 
term  Azazel  as  a  minister  of  the  Evil  One  is  remarkable. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  ''SHEPHERD  OF  HERMAS." 

The  work  that  now  comes  before  us  differs  widely  in  char- 
acter from  those  we  have  already  considered.  They  consist 
of  letters,  sermons  or  treatises,  and  belong  to  the  ordinary 
types  of  religious  literature.  The  "  Shepherd  of  Hermas  "  is 
of  a  more  ambitious  scope.  It  professes  to  be  the  record  of 
revelations  made  by  an  angel  on  many  points  of  the  Christian 
life,  ranged  under  the  several  heads  of  Visions,  Command- 
ments, and  Similitudes,  and  extending  to  considerable  length. 
It  was  written  in  Rome  in  the  Greek  language,  and  speedily 
attained  such  reputation  as  to  be  translated  into  Latin  for 
the  use  of  the  Roman  Church,  a  version  which  dates  almost 
certainly  from  the  second  century.^  Later  versions  were 
also  made. 

This  fact  testifies  to  the  high  value  set  upon  a  book  which 
formed  almost,  if  not  quite,  the  only  example  of  projDhetic 
literature  in  the  early  Church.^  Not  that  the  "  Shepherd  " 
is  a  prophecy  in  the  narrow  ^oopular  sense,  for  it  contains  no 
predictions.  But  it  combines  the  assumption  of  direct  super- 
natural teaching  with  general  views  on  the  mission  of  the 
Church  and.  the  way  of  salvation,  directed  towards  the  prac- 
tical object  of  reforming  certain  abuses  in  the  writer's  own 
community.  This  gives  it  its  main  interest  for  us.  As  the 
Old  Testament  and  Apocryphal  Scriptures  have  their  Daniel 
and    Esdras    respectively,   as   the    New   Testament   has  its 

^  The  antiquity  of  the  Latin  version,  which  we  fortunately  possess 
entire,  is  shown  by  the  translator  thinking  it  necessary  to  explain  the 
word  Episcopi  by  prcesides  Ecclesice,  and  by  other  less  striking-  marks  of 
early  date — e.g.,  nuntius  for  Angelus,  &c. 

^  The  second  Epistle  of  S.  Peter  and  that  of  S.  Jude  are  probably  in- 
stances of  what  were  known  as  prophetic  writings  in  the  apostolic  age. 


112  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

Apocalypse,   so  the  Patristic  records    can  point  to  Hermas 
as  an  example  of  the  same  spiritual  illumination. 

In  order  to  give  the  reader  some  general  idea  of  the  book, 
which  seems  to  be  less  appreciated  than  it  deserves,  we  pro- 
pose to  give  a  short  summary  of  its  contents,  omitting  the 
homiletic  portions,  and  confining  ourselves  to  its  peculiarly 
distinctive  features. 

HePmas,  a  slave  of  uncertain  nationality,  was  sold  at  Eome 
to  a  lady  named  Rhoda.  After  an  interval  of  some  years, 
during  which  he  doubtless  obtained  his  freedom,  he  was  ad- 
mitted to  her  intimate  companionship,  and  learned  to  love 
her  as  a  sister.  On  one  occasion  he  surprised  her  while 
bathing  in  the  Tiber.  Having  assisted  her  out  of  the  water, 
the  thought  came  to  him,  "  How  happy  I  might  have  been 
if  I  had  had  such  a  woman  as  this  for  my  wife  !  "  It  should 
be  remarked  that  Hermas  was  a  married  man  of  middle  age, 
with  grown-up  children,  and  that  his  domestic  relations  were 
far  from  satisfactory.  Some  time  after,  while  walking  to 
Cuma3,  meditating  after  his  wont,  he  fell  asleep  on  the  road, 
and  in  a  vision  was  transported  by  a  precipitous  path  across 
a  torrent  into  a  level  country,  where  he  saw  the  heavens 
opened  and  Rhoda  beckoning  to  him  with  the  words,  "  Hail, 
Hermas !  "  He  asked  her  what  she  did  there,  and  she 
answered,  "  I  am  brought  hither  to  convict  thee  of  sin 
before  God."  Hermas  begged  her  to  explain  herself,  where- 
upon she  reminded  him  of  the  thought  that  had  passed 
through  his  mind  at  the  river-side,  and  advised  him  to  pray 
for  the  Divine  forgiveness.  The  heavens  then  closed,  and 
Hermas  lay  trembling  with  fear,  and  almost  in  despair,  when 
an  aged  lady  appeared  sitting  on  a  throne  as  of  white  wool, 
clothed  in  shinino-  raiment,  holdino*  a  book  in  her  hand.  She 
asked  him  why  he,  who  had  been  always  cheerful,  was  now 
so  sad.  He  told  her  the  reason,  and  she  assured  him  that 
though  he  had  for  the  moment  lapsed  from  his  accustomed 
virtue,  it  was  not  on  this  account  that  the  Divine  displeasure 
was  aroused,  but  rather  because  of  his  faulty  management  of 
his  sons,  who  (it  appears)  had  been  guilty  of  disgraceful  con- 
duct, and  brought  on  him  the  loss  of  a  once  thriving  business. 


THE  SHEPHERD  OF  HERMAS.  ii,^ 

She  directed  him  to  begin  forthwith  a  stricter  discipline,  and 
offered,  before  departing,  to  read  him  a  chapter  from  the 
book  in  her  hand.  Hermas  listened  with  attention  mingled 
with  dread,  but  could  not  recall  more  than  the  last  few  words, 
which  happily  were  such  as  to  reassure  him.  The  lady, 
having  finished,  rose  from  her  chair,  which  was  immediately 
lifted  by  four  young  men,  and  carried  towards  the  sun- 
risino^.  She  then  touched  his  bosom,  and  uttering  a  few 
words  of  comfort  with  a  cheery  smile,  was  transported  by 
two  men  into  the  eastern  quarter  of  heaven.  Her  last  words 
rung  in  his  ears  ;  they  were,  ''  Hermas,  play  the  man  !  " 

The  second  vision  appeared  in  the  same  place,  not  long 
after  the  first.  The  lady  offered  him  her  book,  which  he 
read,  but  for  some  time  could  not  remember.  Then  its  con- 
tents returned  to  him  ;  they  were  partly  personal  to  himself, 
and  partly  referred  to  the  rulers  of  the  Church  in  Rome, 
to  whom  he  was  bidden  to  communicate  its  warnings.  A 
handsome  youth  then  appeared,  who  explained  to  him  that 
the  lady  he  had  seen  was  not  the  Sibyl  as  he  had  fancied,  but 
Ecclesia  or  the  Church,  who  wore  the  form  of  an  aged  dame, 
because  she  is  the  eldest  of  created  things,  for  whose  sake, 
in  fact,  the  world  was  made. 

The  third  vision  occurred  in  another  locality,  chosen  at  the 
lady's  instance  by  Hermas  himself.  There  he  saw  an  ivory 
bench  draped  in  white  linen,  to  which  the  lady  advanced 
attended  by  six  youths.  She  bade  him  sit  on  her  left  hand, 
explaining  that  the  right  hand  seat  was  reserved  for  such 
as  suffered  persecution  for  the  cause  of  Christ.  She  then 
pointed  out  to  him  the  six  youths  engaged  in  building  a 
tower  of  many  kinds  of  stones,  which  were  brought  from 
the  pit  by  other  young  men.  Some  of  these  stones  were 
wrought  into  the  tower,  others  were  in  various  ways  rejected. 
She  explained  to  him  that  this  tower  was  the  Church  on 
earth ;  the  six  youths  were  the  six  principal  angels,  the 
other  young  men  the  inferior  angels,  who  were  gathering 
the  nations  into  it.  The  tower  was  built  in  water,  to  show 
that  membership  of  the  Church  is  obtained  through  baptism; 
and  its  foundations  were  cast  in  the  rock,  which  is  the  Word 

H 


114  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

of  God.  Hermas  put  many  questions  to  her  concerning  the 
various  sorts  of  stones,  each  of  which  was  emblematic  of 
some  class  of  baptized  Christians,  whose  judgment  would 
be  in  accordance  with  the  treatment  of  the  stones  in  the 
vision.  She  next  showed  him  seven  women  standing  round 
the  tower.  These  are  the  seven  Christian  graces.  Faith  the 
mother  of  them  all ;  then  Temperance,  Simplicity,  Innocence, 
Modesty,  Knowledge,  Love,  all  born  successively  one  from 
another.  Then  followed  other  appearances,  the  explanation 
of  which  Hermas  was  bidden  to  seek  by  prayer  and  fasting. 
On  complying  with  this  condition,  he  was  enlightened  by  a 
young  man,  evidently  an  angel,  on  all  the  points  on  which 
he  sought  information. 

The  fourth  vision  was  seen  twenty  days  after  the  third,  in 
a  retired  spot  near  the  Campanian  road.  A  cloud  of  dust, 
as  if  from  a  large  herd  of  cattle,  appeared,  but  as  it  drew 
near,  Hermas  beheld  a  huge  and  uncouth  monster,  out  of 
whose  mouth  proceeded  a  swarm  of  fiery  locusts.  Beside 
himself  with  terror,  he  cried  for  deliverance.  A  heavenly 
voice  reassured  him ;  he  took  courage,  and  passed  it  un- 
scathed. Then  he  met  a  damsel  fair  of  mien,  but  with 
silver  locks,  arrayed  in  gorgeous  apparel,  in  whom,  though 
changed,  he  recognised  his  friend  Ecclesia.  She  explained 
to  him  that  the  beast  was  a  type  of  the  persecutions  ■  that 
shortly  awaited  the  faithful,  and  entered  into  further  details 
on  the  accessories  of  the  vision. 

The  fifth  and  last  vision  is  introductory  to  the  Command- 
ments, which  form  the  second  section  of  the  book.  A  man 
of  august  demeanour,  habited  like  a  shepherd,  visited  Hermas 
in  his  own  home,  and  offered  to  remain  as  a  permanent  guest. 
Suspecting  some  design  of  the  Evil  One,  Hermas  received 
him  doubtfully ;  but  his  visitor,  changing  into  another  form, 
revealed  a  countenance  which  Hermas  recognised  at  once 
as  that  of  the  Angel  of  Repentance,  whom  he  now  gladly 
welcomed  as  his  own  Guardian  Spirit. 

From  this  incident  the  book  derives  its  title  of  The 
Shepherd.  The  second  and  third  divisions  are  supposed  to 
be  spoken  by  the  angel  in  this  pastoral  guise.     The  second 


THE  SHEPHERD   OF  HERMAS.  115 

division  contains  twelve  commandments,  the  first  of  which  is 
an  important  formulation  of  the  central  truth  of  theology, 
and  may  be  taken  as  the  basis  of  later  authoritative  pro- 
nouncements. The  words  are  quoted  as  Scripture  by  Irenseus,! 
and  referred  to  by  Origen  and  Athanasius :  "  First  of  all 
believe  that  God  is  One,  who  created  and  set  in  order  all 
things,  and  made  all  things  to  exist  out  of  non-existence, 
who  comprehends  all  things,  being  Himself  incomprehen- 
sible. Believe  in  Him  and  fear  Him,  and  believing  in  Him, 
be  continent.  Guard  this  doctrine,  and  thou  shalt  cast  away 
from  thee  all  wickedness,  and  put  on  all  the  virtue  of  right- 
eousness, and  thou  shalt  live  unto  God,  if  thou  keep  this 
commandment. ' ' 

The  second  commandment  speaks  of  simplicity,  the  third 
of  truthfulness,  in  which  Hermas  admits  himself  in  past 
times  to  have  failed.  The  fourth  treats  of  chastity,  and, 
from  its  authoritative  tone,  seems  to  legislate  for  the  Church. 
A  decision  is  given  by  the  angel  on  the  difficult  questions 
connected  with  unfaithfulness  to  the  marriage  vow :  "A 
man  may  not  without  sin  live  with  his  wife,  if  he  knows  her 
to  be  unfaithful  and  unrepentant.  He  must  separate  from  her 
and  lead  the  single  life ;  if  he  marries  again,  he  sins.  If  the 
guilty  one  repents,  the  husband  (or  wife,  for  of  course  these 
rules  are  reciprocal)  must  accept  such  repentance,  but  only 
once." 

The  reason  why  marriage  immediately  after  divorce  for 
infidelity  is  forbidden  is  because  it  cuts  off  all  chance  of  re- 
pentance from  the  offending  j)arty.  By  the  sacrament  of 
baptism  all  previous  sins  are  washed  away ;  after  baptism 
there  ought  to  be  no  lapse  into  sin :  pardon,  however,  is 
allowed  to  one  such  lapse  if  followed  by  sincere  repentance, 
but  to  no  more  than  one.  Further  post-baptismal  sin  cuts 
off  from  salvation.  Eemarriage  after  widowhood  is  permis- 
sible, but  not  recommended. 

It  was  this  judgment  of  Hermas  that  so  greatly  scan- 
dalised Tertullian  after  he  had  accepted  the  rigid  tenets  of 

^  Ir.  iv.  20,  2.  KoXQs  ovv  elirev  7/  7pa07j  i]  Xeyovaa,  Upwrov  iravTwv  Trlarcv- 
(Tov    OTL  eh  icTTLP  6  6e6s  6  ra  Travra  Krlaas  Kal  KarapTiaas. 


ii6  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

Montanism.  He  inveighs  in  no  measured  terms  against  the 
"Apocryphal  Shepherd  of  adulterers,"  and  declares  that  the 
book  was  adjudged  spurious  and  apocryphal  by  the  entire 
synod  of  the  churches.^  On  the  justice  of  this  assertion 
something  will  be  said  hereafter.  But  it  must  be  confessed 
that  Hermas  betrays  a  personal  sense  of  relief  at  the  lenity 
of  the  angel's  views,  which  seems  to  suggest  that  "  the  wish 
was  father  to  the  thought." 

The  fifth  commandment  treats  of  longsuffering  and  com- 
mand of  temper.  The  cause  and  effects  of  anger  are  de- 
scribed at  length,  but  without  the  power  of  analysis  shown 
by  Seneca  or  Epictetus.  The  sixth  describes  the  two  paths 
of  justice  and  injustice,  and  attributes  them  to  the  influence 
of  the  angels  who  preside  over  each.  This  and  the  follow- 
ing sections  afford  frequent  parallels  with  the  Epistle  of  Bar- 
nabas and  the  Apostolic  Teaching.  No  doubt  the  subject 
was  a  commonplace  of  the  early  Christian  moralists. 

The  seventh  and  eighth  commandments  treat  of  the  fear 
of  God,  and  of  abstinence ;  the  ninth  of  faith  and  the  neces- 
sity of  a  mind  free  from  doubt ;  the  tenth  of  cheerfulness  and 
gloom.  The  eleventh  begins  with  a  vision  of  men  seated  on 
benches  (sichsellia),  while  another  sat  on  a  cathedra,  or  presi- 
dential chair.  The  former  denote  the  faithful,  the  latter  is 
the  false  prophet.  By  him  we  are  probably  to  understand 
some  influential  teacher,  who  disseminated  what  soon  came 
to  be  known  as  Gnostic  views ;  but  Hermas  treats  the  Gnos- 
tics so  gently  that  we  may  be  sure  they  had  not  in  his  time 
revealed  their  full  power  of  injury.  Valentinus  came  to 
Rome  before  the  middle  of  the  second  century ;  and  as  he 
set  the  Church  ablaze  with  his  teaching,  it  would  be  impos- 
sible to  assign  to  Hermas  a  date  posterior  to  his  visit.  The 
picture  of  the  unstable  Christian  drawn  different  ways  by  the 
plausible  arguments  of  unscrupulous  pretenders  to  the  pro- 
phetic office,  and  of  the  contrast  between  the  false  prophet 

1  De  Pudic.  cc.  lo  and  20.  Sed  cederem  tibi  si  scriptura  pastoris,  quae 
sola  moechos  amat,  divino  instrumento  meruisset  incidi,  si  non  ab  omni 
concilio  Ecclesiariira,  etiam  vestrarum  (the  Catholic  Church)  inter  apocry- 
pha et  falsa  iudicaretur,  &c. 


THE   SHEPHERD  OF   HERMAS.  117 

and  the  true,  are  among  the  best  portions  of  the  whole  book, 
and  well  deserve  perusal  not  only  from  their  vivid  descrip- 
tiveness,  but  from  the  light  they  throw  on  the  religious  views 
of  the  time.  There  is  little  doubt  that  Hernias  claimed  for 
himself  prophetic  rank ;  and  as  we  can  detect  a  jDersonal  bias 
in  most  of  his  general  observations,  we  may  infer  that  the 
true  prophet's  method  as  here  depicted  is  an  idealised  repre- 
sentation of  that  of  Hermas  himself. 

The  twelfth  commandment  treats  of  good  and  evil  desire ; 
after  the  exposition  of  which  Hermas  expresses  a  doubt 
whether  human  nature  is  capable  of  fulfilling  the  Divine 
requirements.  The  angel  explains  to  him  the  power  of  grace, 
the  longsufferiug  forgiveness  of  God,  and  the  necessity  of  a 
renewal  of  heart.     This  closes  the  second  part  of  the  work. 

The  third,  and  by  far  the  largest  portion,  is  devoted  to  the 
ten  F arables  or  Similitudes.  The  first  of  these  is  based  on 
the  well-known  comparison  of  the  Christian  life  to  citizen- 
ship in  the  celestial  city,  so  powerfully  sketched  by  S.  Paul 
and  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews.  The  second  is  drawn  from 
the  mutual  dependence  of  the  elm  and  the  vine,  as  illustrated 
by  any  of  the  vineyards  of  Italy.  This  comparison  is 
familiar  to  classical  students  from  the  allusions  in  Virgil  and 
Horace.  It  is  here  applied  to  the  relationship  of  rich  and 
poor  in  the  Christian  community,  and  to  their  divinely- 
appointed  power  of  mutual  help,  the  one  by  material,  the 
other  by  spiritual  charity.  The  third  and  fourth  are  drawn 
from  the  spectacle  of  a  plantation  of  trees,  some  of  which 
are  quite  leafless,  some  shooting  forth  tender  leaves,  others 
dry  and  dead.  The  points  of  comparison  in  this  instance  are 
far-fetched  and  not  very  instructive.  The  fifth  similitude  is 
more  elaborate.  Hermas  had  undertaken  what  was  known 
as  a  Station,  i.e.,  a  fast  recurring  at  certain  periods.^  The 
Shepherd  informed  him  of  the  usefulness  of  such  discipline, 
explaining  that  the  true  and  acceptable  fast  is  to  abstain 

1  From  the  use  of  this  word  Westcott  infers  the  later  of  the  suggested 
dates  for  the  book.  It  is,  however,  possible  that  the  word  Statio  came 
into  use  before  we  meet  with  it.  Moreover,  from  the  careful  explanation 
given  by  Hermas,  it  is  clear  it  was  a  new  word  in  his  day. 


ii8  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

from  all  sin.  He  illustrates  his  doctrine  by  the  following 
parable  :  ^  "  A  man  owned  an  estate  worked  by  his  numerous 
servants,  of  whom  he  chose  the  most  trustworthy  to  be  the 
keeper  of  his  vineyard.  He  directed  him  to  hedge  it  round 
and  stake  it  out,  promising  him  his  freedom  when  he  returned 
if  the  work  were  well  done.  The  servant  did  what  was  com- 
manded, and,  having  time  to  spare,  proceeded  further  to 
thoroughly  clean  the  soil  from  weeds.  The  master  returned, 
and  great  was  his  satisfaction  at  his  servant's  industry  and 
goodwill.  He  called  together  his  son  and  his  friends,  and 
proposed  that  as  a  reward  for  his  extra  work  the  servant 
should  be  admitted  to  joint-heirship  with  the  son.  To  this 
they  willingly  agreed.  In  a  few  days  the  lord  sent  the  man 
a  present  of  choice  meats  from  his  own  table.  The  servant 
at  once  summoned  his  fellow-servants  and  gave  them  all  a 
share  in  his  good  things.  This  pleased  the  lord  and  his  son 
still  more."  The  drift  of  this  23arable,  which  is  sufSciently 
obvious,  is  thought  by  some,  though  without  reason,  to  involve 
the  doctrine  of  works  of  supererogation,  fasting  being  con- 
sidered by  Hermas  to  be  one  of  such  works.  But  this  view, 
though  plausible,  is  probably  erroneous.  The  ex^olanation  of 
the  several  items  is  as  follows :  The  estate  is  the  world,  the 
owner  is  God,  his  son  is  the  Holy  Spirit,  his  servant  is  the 
Son  of  God,  the  vines  are  his  people  whom  he  has  planted, 
the  fences  are  the  angels;  the  weeds  are  the  misdeeds  of 
Christians,  the  dainty  meats  are  the  commandments  given 
through  the  Son,  the  friends  and  counsellors  are  the  first- 
created  angels,  the  time  of  the  owner's  absence  is  the 
interval  before  the  end  of  the  world. 

A  point  to  notice  in  this  inter[Dretation  is  the  apparent 
confusion  of  the  Holy  Spirit  with  the  Eternal  Son  of  God,  an 
idea  which  has  a  Gnostic  ring.  The  Christology  of  Hermas 
is  somewhat  undefined,  and  perhaps  inconsistent :  but  Baur 
is  certainly  unjust  in  attributing  to  it  an  Ebionite  signifi- 
cance.    Horner's  masterly  analysis  shows  that,  though  his 

1  The  coherence  of  this  parable  with  the  sentence  which  introduces  it 
is  not  very  clear.  But  the  general  subject  of  fasting  as  an  extra  merit 
supplies  the  connection  in  the  writer's  mind. 


THE  SHEPHERD   OF   HERMAS. 


119 


language  lacks  precision,  Hermas  does  not  confuse  the  Holy 
Spirit  with  the  pre-existing  Logos,  nor  represent  Him  as  the 
Divine  Element  in  the  historical  Christ. 

We  now  pass  to  the  sixth  similitude  (to  which  the  seventh 
is  an  appendix),  that  of  the  two  shepherds  and  the  two  flocks. 
The  sheep  of  the  first  flock  are  seen  feeding  abundantly, 
frisking  about,  and  ranging  abroad  at  will ;  some,  however, 
are  much  less  restive  than  others.  These  last  are  separated 
and  drafted  off  into  the  second  flock,  which  is  watched  over 
by  a  stern  shepherd,  armed  with  a  rod  and  scourge,  who 
drives  them  over  rough  ground  till  they  are  worn  out.  The 
two  shepherds  are  the  Angels  1  of  Pleasure  and  Punishment. 
The  frisky  sheep  are  the  unrepentant  wicked,  the  quieter 
ones  those  that  desire  to  repent  and  are  by  punishment 
disciplined  for  a  return  to  the  Way  of  Life.  The  theory  of 
penitence  given  in  this  chapter  is  that  which  has  prevailed 
so  largely  at  times  in  the  Church,  viz.,  that  confession  of  sin 
and  change  of  life  on  the  sinner's  part  are  not  sufficient,  but 
must  be  supplemented  by  voluntary  humiliation  and  self- 
inflicted  suffering  in  order  to  be  accepted  by  God. 

The  eighth  similitude  is  that  of  a  willow-tree,  whose 
branches  are  lopped  by  the  sickle  of  the  glorious  angel, ^ 
who  distributes  the  small  rods  into  which  the  branches  are 
divided  to  the  different  persons  who  take  shelter  under  the 
tree.  After  a  time  he  returns  to  demand  back  the  rods. 
These  are  brought  to  him  in  various  states  of  freshness  or 
decay.  The  angel,  wishing  to  give  them  all  a  chance  of 
growth,  has  them  planted  in  good  soil  and  carefully  watered. 
The  different  results  of  the  experiment  are  then  described, 
and  explained  with  extreme  minuteness,  a  graduated  scale  of 
characters  from  the  purest  sainthood  to  the  hopeless  condition 
of  the  reprobate  being  drawn,  and  adjusted  to  the  award 
given  in  each  case  by  the  Judge. 

The  ninth  similitude  is  the  most  pretentious  of  all,  and 
occupies  a  full  quarter  of  the  entire  book.     It  belongs  more 

1  The  word  Angel  in  Hermas,  as  in  the  New  Testament,  is  a  neutral  term. 
-  Called  Michael.     Probably  the  same  as  the  Son  of  God  in  Sim.  5  ;  not 
ranked  with  the  other  angels. 


I20  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

accurately  to  the  category  of  a  vision ;  but  Hermas  draws 
no  very  clear  line  between  the  three  media  of  his  revelations. 
He  is  transported  into  Arcadia  ^  into  a  wide  plain  out  of 
which  a  high  mountain  rises,  surrounded  by  twelve  hills, 
each  hill  having  a  different  aspect  and  different  products. 
In  the  midst  of  the  plain  stands  a  huge  stony  rock,  having 
a  gateway  which  shines  like  the  sun,  guarded  by  twelve 
virgins,  with  garments  girt  high,  as  if  for  some  laborious 
work.  Then  there  enter  on  the  scene  six  men  of  dignified 
aspect,  accompanied  by  a  multitude  of  labourers.  They  call 
up  choice  stones  from  the  abyss,  which  come  of  their  own 
accord,  and  are  delivered  to  the  virgins  to  be  carried  through 
the  gate  and  handed  on  to  the  builders  inside.  Soon  are 
raised  on  the  rock  the  foundations  of  a  vast  tower.  The 
labourers  then  go  out  to  search  for  stones  of  all  sizes  and 
colours,  which  they  bring  to  the  gate  and  hand  over  to  the 
virgins.  These  grew  into  9,  lofty  tower,  which,  as  it  ap- 
proaches completion,  the  Lord  of  the  countiy  comes  to  in- 
spect. He  tests  all  the  stones,  and  those  which  will  not  bear 
the  test  are  taken  out,  and  entrusted  to  the  Shepherd  to 
dress  and  clean,  so  as  to  fit  them,  if  possible,  for  reinsertion 
into  the  tower.  Then  follows  a  long  description  of  the  various 
defects  in  the  stones,  answering  to  the  different  faults  of 
character  in  their  human  parallels.  The  larger  part  are 
finally  trimmed  up,  and  by  the  help  of  mortar  and  cement 
present  a  fair  appearance  when  wrought  into  the  wall.  Her- 
mas is  requested  to  assist  the  Shepherd  in  this  work.  The 
Shepherd  then  leaves  him  for  two  days  in  the  company  of 
the  twelve  virgins,  who  treat  him  with  friendly  familiarity, 
insisting  upon  his  passing  the  night  in  their  company,  and 
even  kissing  him,  but  with  all  modesty,  as  sisters  might  kiss 
their  brother.  On  the  Shepherd's  return,  Hermas  applies 
for  an  explanation  of  the  numerous  features  of  the  parable, 
which  is  granted.  The  rock  and  the  gate  both  tj-piij  the 
Son  of  God,  the  former  representing  His  eternal  pre-existence, 

^  Zahn  for  'ApKaSia  would  read  'ApiKia  on  the  ground  that  Hermas  had 
never  travelled  out  of  Italy.  But  in  this  kind  of  literature  accuracy  of 
time  and  place  is  not  to  be  rigorously  demanded. 


THE   SHEPHERD   OF   HERMAS.  121 

the  latter  His  mediatorial  work.  The  Lord  of  the  tower  is 
also  the  Son  of  God;  the  six  overseers  are  the  six  chief 
angels,  the  twelve  virgins  are  the  twelve  divine  graces,  be- 
loved of  all  faithful  souls,  and  are  contrasted  with  twelve 
other  females,  who  are  somewhat  briefly  alluded  to  as  the 
desires  of  the  flesh,  and  who  lure  unstable  souls  to  their 
doom.  The  twelve  graces  are  Faith,  Continence,  Power,^ 
Longsuffering,  Simplicity,  Innocence,  Purity,  Cheerfulness, 
Truth,  Intelligence,  Concord,  and  Love.  The  twelve  evil 
maidens  are  Unbelief,  Incontinence,  Disobedience,  Deceit, 
Grief,  Wickedness,  Luxury,  Anger,  Falsehood,  Folly,  Evil- 
speaking,  and  Hatred.  The  different  classes  of  selected 
stones  typify  the  different  lists  of  the  righteous,  viz.,  the 
patriarchs  before  and  after  the  flood,  the  prophets,  the 
apostles,  and  the  later  heroes  of  the  Gospel.  The  depth 
from  which  all  arise  is  baptism,  even  the  patriarchs  being 
supposed  to  have  partaken  of  it  in  the  abode  of  departed 
spirits.  The  twelve  hills  are  the  twelve  nations  of  mankind, 
each  with  its  own  moral  characteristics.  The  tower  is  the 
Church,  and  the  renewal  of  the  rejected  stones  is  the  discip- 
line of  repentance.  The  explanation  is  enforced  with  tedious 
minuteness,  and  interspersed  with  hortatory  23assages  on  the 
necessity  of  penitence  and  the  terrors  of  the  wrath  to  come. 

The  tenth  similitude  is  preserved  only  in  the  Latin  trans- 
lation. It  forms  a  kind  of  sequel  to  the  last,  and  contains 
the  final  injunctions  of  the  Shepherd  to  Hernias,  and  through 
him  to  all  Christians,  to  persevere.  It  appears  to  be  an  after- 
thought, written  when  the  book  was  already  complete ;  and 
it  contains  no  new  ideas,  except  a  warning  that  unless  the 
Christians  of  his  own  day  are  quick  to  return  to  their  Lord, 
the  tower  will  be  finished  and  they  left  out. 

Such  is  a  brief  and  imperfect  analysis  of  this  curious  book, 
the  high  estimation  of  which  by  such  authorities  as  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  Origen,  and  Athanasius,  is  in  striking  contrast 
to  its  comparative  neglect  by  the  modern  reader.  "  Not  very 
edifying  and  unquestionably  dull,"  is,  we  fear,  the  common 
verdict.  Nothing  shows  better  the  defective  critical  insight 
1  So  the  Greek.     The  Latin  has  'patieniia. 


122  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

which  accompanied  the  reverent  and  earnest  spirit  of  those 
times  than  the  fact  that  the  Shepherd  was  for  some  genera- 
tions quoted  as  Scripture,  and  if  not  held  to  be  inspired,  at 
any  rate  jolaced  little  below  the  Inspired  Writings. 

No  doubt  its  claim  to  be  a  revelation  stood  it  in  good 
stead;  yet,  if  we  compare  it  with  the  remains  of  Clement, 
Polycarp,  or  Ignatius,  its  inferiority  is  at  once  manifest. 
From  beginning  to  end  it  rings  the  changes  on  a  single  idea, 
the  possibility  and  necessity  of  repentance.  Important  as 
this  is,  and  earnestly  as  it  is  enforced,  it  is  hardly  an  adequate 
presentation  of  the  Gospel.  The  reader  will  in  vain  seek  for 
any  intelligent  appreciation  of  the  great  doctrines  on  which 
Christianity  is  built,  or  for  that  wide  view,  that  full  and 
varied  spiritual  insight  that  lends  grandeur  to  the  calm 
tones  of  Clement ;  nor  will  he  find  any  of  that  eager,  tren- 
chant force  that  makes  the  pages  of  Ignatius  sound  like  the 
march  of  a  hero's  tread.  Yet  the  book  has  an  enduring 
value,  partly  as  the  unique  remnant  of  quasi  -  prophetic 
literature,  partly  as  an  earnest  endeavour  to  concentrate 
men's  minds  upon  the  paramount  necessity  of  a  holy  life. 

Notwithstanding  this  sacred  object,  doubts  have  been 
raised  as  to  the  bona  fides  of  the  author.  He  is  held  by 
some  critics  to  have  been  no  genuine  seer,  but  to  have 
clothed  his  own  lucubrations  in  an  apocalyi^tic  dress,  the 
better  to  accredit  them  with  his  contemporaries.  On  this 
theory  the  direction  to  Clement  in  the  third  vision,  request- 
ing him  to  send  the  book  to  foreign  churches,  is  an  inten- 
tional anachronism,  designed  with  the  same  object.  It  is 
difficult  to  disprove  this  \T.ew ;  and  the  more  so  because 
Hermas  betrays  more  than  one  element  of  moral  weakness. 
He  praises  himself,  he  confesses  to  a  lack  of  truthfulness, 
he  lingers  too  wistfully  over  incidents  of  female  intercourse 
for  a  man  of  chaste  mind.  Nevertheless,  the  broad  fact  that 
the  book  so  soon  rose  to  reputation,  in  a  community  by  no 
means  prejudiced  in  its  favour,  seems  incompatible  with  the 
theory  that  it  is  virtually  a  fraud.  Donaldson's  view  is  less 
likely  still.  He  regards  it  as  an  obvious  fiction,  issued  as 
such,  and  decei\4ng  nobody.     But  here,  again,  the  serious 


THE  SHEPHERD   OF   HERMAS.  123 

use  made  of  it  by  great  Fathers  of  the  Church  stands  in  the 
way.  It  is  impossible  to  believe  that  confessedly  fictitious 
visions,  even  of  higher  merit  than  those  of  Hermas,  would 
be  cited  as  Scripture  by  men  ready  to  die  for  their  faith. 
The  only  tenable  view  is  that  which  the  book  itself  supports, 
viz.,  that  Hermas  really  believed  himself  to  be  the  recipient 
of  angelic  instruction,  and,  either  in  dreams  or  in  abstracted 
moods  of  thought,  saw  the  spectacles  which  he  has  described. 
The  reader  who  comes  to  the  book  without  prejudice  will 
doubtless  question  the  objective  reality  of  the  revelation 
claimed  by  Hermas;  he  will  rank  him  with  those  whose 
claims  to  genius  Time,  the  master-critic,  has  disallowed, 
while  granting  him  the  secondary  distinction  of  an  honour- 
able place  among  pious  writers. 

The  style  of  the  Shepherd  is  simple  and  clear,  though  at 
times  colloquial.  His  dialect  is  scarcely  the  Hellenistic  of 
ecclesiastical  authors.  It  has  no  Hebraic  affinities,  and  shows 
no  traces  of  the  study  of  the  LXX.,  in  this  differing  remark- 
ably from  that  of  Clement,  which  is  saturated  with  reminis- 
cences of  the  Old  Testament.  Nor  does  Hermas  display  any 
greater  knowledge  of  the  New  Testament.  The  only  book 
with  which  affinities  can  be  proved  is  the  Epistle  of  James, 
to  which  indeed  the  resemblances  are  very  marked.  His 
theology  also  belongs  to  the  same  school,  being  practical  and 
undogmatic.  The  Pauline  doctrine  of  justifying  faith  is 
alluded  to,  but  does  not  enter  into  his  system,  or  affect  his 
modes  of  thought.  There  are  some  correspondences  with 
the  teaching  of  S.  Peter,  and,  as  might  be  expected,  occa- 
sional points  of  contact  with  the  Apocalypse.  But  on  the 
whole  Hermas  cannot  be  said  to  show  much  familiarity  either 
with  Scripture  ^  or  with  the  scheme  of  Christian  theology, 
though  there  is  nothing  to  show  that  he  wandered  away 
from  either. 

The  materials  for  determining  his  personal  history  and 
position  in  the  Roman  Church  are  extremely  scanty.     The 

1  It  is  odd  that  the  only  book  he  quotes  by  name  is  the  apocryphal  one 
of  Eldad  and  Modad,  to  which  also  the  Pseudo-Clement  is  supposed  to 
refer. 


124  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS. 

few  notices  of  his  life  scattered  in  the  book  have  been  already 
referred  to.  His  rank  in  the  Church  is  indicated  under  the 
type  of  a  bench  (svhsellium),  as  distinguished  from  a  chair 
(cathedra)  ;  by  which  we  are  to  understand  that  he  was  a 
layman.  Moreover,  that  he  disapproved  of  the  strife  for  pre- 
eminence that  existed  among  the  Eoman  presbyterate,  we 
gather  from  several  allusions.  Possibly  he  may  have  tried 
without  success  to  obtain  a  place  in  its  ranks. 

As  to  his  date,  we  can  bring  it  within  tolerably  definite 
limits  if  we  accept  the  authority  of  the  Muratorian  fragment 
on  the  canon  as  decisive.  This  fragment,  which  perhaps 
dates  from  about  a.d.  170,  and  which  Lightfoot  believes  to 
be  a  translation  of  an  earlier  Greek  document  in  Iambic  verse, 
contains  an  imjDortant  sentence  relating  to  the  Shepherd. 
The  words  are : — 

"  But  the  Shepherd  was  written  quite  recently  in  our  own  day 
in  Rome  by  Hermas,  at  the  time  when  his  brother  Pius  occupied 
the  chair  of  the  Roman  Church  ;  and  for  this  reason,  although 
it  ought  to  be  read,  it  cannot  be  set  forth  to  the  people  in  the 
Church  either  among  the  prophets  whose  number  is  complete,  or 
among  the  apostles  in  the  latter  days."  ^ 

This  passage  is  of  importance  on  two  accounts.  First,  for 
the  chronology,  with  which  we  are  now  concerned;  and, 
secondly,  as  bearing  upon  the  reception  given  to  the  book. 
The  assertion  that  Hermas,  the  writer  of  the  "  Pastor,"  was 
a  brother  of  Pius,  made  as  it  is  by  a  contemporary,  carries 
such  weight  that  nothing  short  of  overwhelming  counter- 
evidence  can  upset  it.  And  no  such  evidence  is  forthcoming. 
It  is  true  other  considerations  taken  by  themselves  might  sug- 
gest an  earlier  date,  e.g.,  the  state  of  church  government  and 
discipline  indicated,  which  belong  to  the  Primitive  Church,  the 
mention  of  Clement  as  a  contemporary,  the  early  acceptance 
of  the  book  by  the  Church.     But  none  of  these  objections 

1  Vv.  73,  80.  Pastorem  vero  nuperrime  temporibus  nostris  in  urbe  Roma 
Herma  conscripsit  sedente  cathedra  urbis  Romae  ecclesiae  Pio  episcojDO 
fratre  ejus,  et  ideo  legi  quidem  oportet,  se  publicare  vero  in  ecclesia  popvilo 
neque  inter  prophetas  completum  numero  (numerum  ?)  neque  inter  Apos- 
tolos  in  fine  temporum  potest. 


THE  SHEPHERD   OF   HERMAS.  125 

are  sufficient  to  outweigh  the  express  testimony  of  a  credible 
witness.  It  is  uncertain  at  what  date  Episcopacy  proper  was 
established  in  Eome.  The  mention  of  Clement  need  not 
imply  that  he  was  living  at  the  time ;  possibly,  as  before 
noted,  the  name  is  an  intentional  anachronism.  Or  again, 
Hermas  being  perhaps  an  elder  brother  of  Pius,  may  have 
lived  almost  if  not  quite  as  far  back  as  Clement's  time.  The 
words  nuperrime  temporibus  nostris  do  not  suggest  any  very 
recent  date,  but  rather  the  reverse.  The  term  is  used  only 
as  a  contrast  to  a  more  remote  period.  It  means  little  more 
than  that  he  was  a  contemporary.  On  the  whole,  therefore, 
the  balance  of  probability  lies  in  assuming  that  Muratori's 
"author"  was  truly  informed,  and  that  Hermas  had  written 
his  book  soon  after  A.D.  139,  if  not  a  little  before.  Zahn, 
however,  one  of  the  ablest  and  most  recent  editors,  claims 
for  it  a  much  earlier  date  (A.D.  96  or  97),  and  Salmon  also 
seems  to  incline  to  the  same  view.  This  theory  makes  the 
acceptance  of  the  work  by  so  many  churches  easier  to  under- 
stand, and  intrinsically  would  be  probable  enough,  were  not 
the  evidence  against  it  too  strong  to  be  set  aside. 

We  shall  now  proceed  to  mention  briefly  the  chief  writers 
of  the  Church  who  allude  to  the  Shepherd,  with  a  view  to 
showing  the  amount  of  authority  accorded  to  it.  To  begin 
with  the  Greek  Church.  The  earliest  Father  who  refers  to  it 
is  Clement  of  Alexandria.  He  quotes  or  alludes  to  it  in 
some  eight  or  nine  passages  1  with  much  apparent  reverence, 
though  without  explicitly  asserting  that  he  regards  it  as 
having  the  authority  of  Scripture.  He  is  followed  by  Origen, 
who  gives  it  as  his  opinion  that  the  book  is  inspired,  and 
ventures  the  conjecture  (since  uncritically  adopted  by  nume- 
rous ecclesiastical  writers)  that  the  author  is  none  other  than 
the  Hermas  mentioned  by  S.  Paul  in  his  Epistle  to  the 
Eomans.  In  the  time  of  Eusebius  we  learn  that  the  book 
was  generally  used  in  the  preparation  of  catechumens,  and 
found  supporters  for  its  insertion  among  the  books  of  Scrip- 
ture, chiefly  on  the  ground  of  its  conjectured  authorship. 
To  this  claim,  both  for  critical  reasons  and  also  from  the 
1  Given  in  Harnack's  Proleg.  pp.  liii.-liv. 


126  THE  APOSTOLIC   FATHERS. 

general  bent  of  his  mind,  Eusebius  is  decidedly  opposed. 
But  from  the  cautiousness  of  his  language  it  is  not  very  easy 
to  decide  what  his  judgment  is.  He  seems  inclined,  however, 
to  place  it  among  the  orthodox  voOa  or  spurious  books.^ 
Coming  to  the  fourth  century,  we  find  that  the  celebrated 
Codex  Sinaiticus  gives  it  a  place  in  the  Appendix  to  the  New 
Testament,  after  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas.  Since,  however, 
several  ^^assages  lent  themselves  to  an  Arian  interpretation, 
the  Shepherd  must  have  gradually  dropped  out  of  use,  or,  at 
any  rate,  declined  in  authority.  Accordingly,  we  find  it 
omitted  from  the  Alexandrian  MS.  at  the  beginning  of  the 
fifth  century.  Its  further  use  in  the  Eastern  Church  is  so 
slight  as  to  amount  to  virtual  non-recognition. 

In  the  Western  Church  it  had  a  longer  currency.  Without 
attaching  any  weight  to  the  theory,  which,  from  the  un- 
doubted resemblances  between  it  and  the  so-called  Second 
Epistle  of  Clement,  would  infer  some  connection  between 
them,  we  may  remark  that  both  are  the  product  of  the  same 
age  and  surroundings,  and  that  therefore  some  similarity  is 
to  be  ex[3ected.  The  first  undoubted  allusion  is  found  in 
Irenseus,  and  has  been  already  quoted.^  This  makes  it  pro- 
bable that  the  book  was  read  in  his  day  in  the  Galilean 
churches,  but  not  that  it  was  ranked  on  a  level  with  the 
Canonical  Scriptures ;  for  in  that  case  it  is  inconceivable  that 
Iren^us  should  not  have  made  more  frequent  use  of  it. 
Somewhat  later  Tertullian,  writing  at  Carthage,  speaks  of 
it  in  the  same  terms  as  Ireneeus,^  but  also  without  implj^ng 
that  it  was  ranked  on  equal  terms  with  the  books  of  the 
Prophets  or  Apostles.  Some  years  after,  when  he  had  become 
a  Montanist,  and  changed  his  attitude  of  reverence  for  one 
of  contemptuous  hostility,  he  declares  that  the  pretensions  of 
Hennas  to  canonicity  had  been  universally  disallowed.*    The 

'  Hist.  Ecc.  iii.  25,  4 :  ev  tols  vodois  KaTareTaxOo}  ...  o  re  Xeyofxevos 
noifirjv  .  .  .  ravTa  Be  irdvTa  tQv  dvTLK€yofji.€POJv  av  e'ir].  It  is  not  clear  whether 
he  regards  it  as  merely  pseudonymous,  or  whether  he  also  denies  its  divine 
inspiration. 

-  See  above,  p.  115,  n. 

^  De  Orat.  16.    Inimo  contra  scrlpturam  fecerit,  si  quis,  &c. 

4  De  Pud.  10,  before  quoted. 


THE   SHEPHERD   OF   HERMAS.  127 

index  of  verses  of  Scripture  appended  to  the  Codex  Claromon- 
tamts,  which  probably  belongs  to  the  same  i)eriod,  refers  to 
the  "  Pastor  "  after  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  classing 
it  with  the  Eevelation  of  Peter  and  the  Acts  of  Paul,  works 
which  were  never  included  within  the  canon.  The  Pseudo- 
Cyprianic  treatise  de  Aleatorihics,  also  written  in  Africa,  and 
probably  in  the  third  century,  quotes  a  j)assage  of  Hermas  as 
Divine  Scripture.  Later  still,  the  author  of  the  Ca7^mina 
adversus  Marcionem  refers  to  Hermas  as  Angelicus  Pastor, 
from  which  title  Harnack  draws  the  conclusion  that  in  the 
fourth  century,  when  the  above  work  was  almost  certainly 
written,  the  ''  Pastor  "  had  already  ceased  to  be  popularly 
known  in  the  African  Church. 

In  Eome  itself,  early  in  the  second  century,  the  fic- 
titious letter  of  Pope  Pius  I.  appeals  to  the  authority  of 
Hermas  for  the  command  to  keep  Easter  on  a  Sunday.  And 
in  the  "  Liberian  Chronicle"  (a.d.  354)  he  is  again  referred 
to  as  a  doctor  of  Angelic  teaching,  though  the  probability  is 
that  the  compiler  is  here  reproducing  the  words  of  Hip- 
polytus,  which  go  back  a  century  earlier,  when  they  would 
much  more  truly  represent  the  current  opinion  of  the  Church. 
From  this  time  onwards  the  notices  of  the  "  Pastor"  are  com- 
paratively few,  and  seem  to  imply  that  the  book  had  dropped 
almost  entirely  out  of  public  use,  though  still  employed  for 
purposes  of  private  edification.  Throughout  the  Middle  Ages, 
however,  occasional  attempts  were  made  to  rehabilitate  its 
authority,  until  they  were  finally  disposed  of  by  a  decision  of 
the  Council  of  Trent. 


BOOK  n. 

THE    HERETICAL    SECTS, 


CHAPTER  I 

JEWISH   PERVERSIONS  OF   CHRISTIANITY— EBIONISM. 

The  structure  of  Christianity  was  erected  on  the  founda- 
tion of  Christ's  Messiahship.  Detached  from  its  Judaic 
antecedents,  the  coming  of  Christ  would  be  a  phenomenon 
impossible  to  explain.  At  the  same  time,  His  Messiahship 
was  only  the  foundation  of  the  Christian  structure,  not  the 
structure  itself.  The  effort  to  transcend  the  limitations  of  the 
Jewish  conception  was  first  made  by  S.  Paul,  and  its  striking 
success  provoked  the  bitter  jealousy  of  those  Christians  of 
the  circumcision  who  had  not  freed  themselves  from  their 
national  prejudices.  Even  in  the  earliest  age  of  the  Church 
we  find  them  making  S.  James  their  rallying-point,  and, 
by  a  dishonest  use  of  his  influential  name,  undermining  the 
authority  of  S.  Paul.  How  fierce  the  contest  was  we  see 
from  many  of  S.  Paul's  Epistles;  and  it  continued  to  rage 
after  his  removal  from  this  earthly  scene.  S.  Luke's  con- 
ciliatory writings  and  S.  John's  labours  in  Asia  were  powerful 
factors  in  the  mitigation  of  this  rivalry ;  but,  though  miti- 
gated, it  was  not  wholly  extinct,  for  in  the  time  of  Justin  we 
still  find  among  Christians  of  Jewish  descent  a  party  who 
insisted  on  the  observance  of  the  law  by  Gentile  converts,  as 
well  as  a  party  who,  while  continuing  the  Mosaic  ordinances 
themselves,  did  not  seek  to  impose  them  on  others.  These 
parties  are  the  lineal  representatives,  the  one  of  the  Juda- 
isers  whom  S.  Paul  combats,  and  the  other  of  the  genuine 
Church  of  the  Circumcision,  of  whom  S.  James  and  S.  Peter 
were  the  foremost  leaders. 

Now,   both  these  classes  are  often  sj)oken  of  under  the 
common  title  of   '"'  Ebionite."     The  exact  meaning  of  this 


132  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

term  is  uncertain.  It  is  derived  from  a  Hebrew  word  signi- 
fying "poor,"  and  may  have  been  applied  to  the  Hebrew 
Christians  on  account  of  their  poverty  (of  which  we  have 
frequent  evidence  in  the  New  Testament),  or  it  may  have 
been  assumed  by  them  in  token  of  the  humility  of  their 
condition  and  spiritual  ideal.  But  among  Gentile  churches 
the  epithet  suggested  quite  a  different  meaning ;  it  implied 
poverty,  not  of  outward  condition,  but  of  Christological  con- 
fession. An  Ebionite  was  one  who  held  inadequate  views  as 
to  the  Person  of  our  Lord.  From  this  standpoint,  however, 
a  distinction  must  be  made  between  the  two  classes.  The 
more  liberal  party  mentioned  by  Justin,  who  lingered  on  till 
the  end  of  the  fourth  century  under  the  time-honoured  name 
of  Nazarenes,  are  considered  by  S.  Jerome  to  be  only  sepa- 
rated from  the  creeds  and  usages  of  Catholic  Christendom 
by  their  retention  of  the  Mosaic  Law.  It  is  to  this  sect  that 
we  must  refer  a  very  early  work,i  entitled  "  The  Testaments 
of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,"  which,  in  its  liberal  attitude  to- 
wards Gentile  Christians,  and  its  honourable  mention  of  S. 
Paul,  proclaims  its  connection  with  the  teaching  of  the  Church 
of  Jerusalem.  Its  most  interesting  feature  is  the  conception 
of  our  Lord  as  the  Giver  of  the  New  Law,  and  as  sprung, 
not  from  the  tribe  of  Judah,  but  from  that  of  Levi. 

To  the  second  sect  noticed  by  Justin  more  properly  belongs 
the  name  of  Ebionite.  These  were  a  larger  and  more  widely- 
spread  body  than  the  Nazarenes.  Their  points  of  divergence 
from  the  Church  were  mainly  three :  the  imposition  of  the 
Mosaic  covenant  upon  all  Christians ;  the  rejection  of  the 
authority  and  writings  of  S.  Paul ;  and  the  denial  of  the 
miraculous  birth  of  Christ,  whom  they  declared  to  have  been 
a  mere  man,  justified  solely  by  his  perfect  obedience  to  the 
Mosaic  law.  The  form  of  this  doctrine,  which  is  most  pro- 
minent in  early  writers,  is  purely  Pharisaic ;  but  in  the  second 
century  we  meet  with  a  new  type  of  it,  agreeing  with  the 
former  up  to  a  certain  point,  but  introducing  a  foreign 
element,  half  ascetic,  half  mystical.     This  element  Lightfoot, 

^  Probably  before  the  rebellion  of  Bar-cochba,  but  possibly  a  little  later. 
Edited  by  Sinker  (Cambridge,  1S69). 


EBIONISM.  133 

having  regard  to  the  original  headquarters  of  the  sect  in  the 
region  of  the  Dead  Sea,  considers  due  to  Essene  influence  in 
the  first  instance,  though  not  excluding  other  influences  more 
directly  Gnostic  and  Oriental.  The  type  of  doctrine  in  this 
sect  underwent  various  modifications ;  so  that,  according  as 
the  native  or  foreign  elements  preponderated,  it  may  be  more 
correctly  designated  Essene  Ebionism  or  Gnostic  Ebionism. 
The  modifications  referred  to  consisted  in  a  difference  of 
statements  regarding  the  nature  of  the  law,  and  the  con- 
ception of  Christ's  Person;  the  Essene  Ebionites  inclining 
to  regard  Him  as  born  in  the  course  of  nature,  the  Gnostic 
Ebionites  admitting  His  supernatural  origin,  though  always 
with  unorthodox  limitations. 

This  form  of  Judaic  Christianity  seems  soon  to  have 
eclipsed  the  elder.  It  owed  this  prominence  partly  to  its 
stronger  missionary  zeal,  partly  to  its  greater  literary  capacity. 
Two  documents  of  considerable  importance  are  known  to 
have  emanated  from  it.  One  of  these,  the  well-known  Clemen- 
tine Homilies  and  Recognitions,  we  shall  discuss  at  some  length 
in  the  next  chapter.  The  other,  which  is  now  lost,  was  even 
more  influential.  We  allude  to  the  Book  of  Elchasai  or 
Elxai,^  from  which  the  sectaries  are  sometimes  called 
Elchasaites.  This  word,  which  signifies  Hidden  Power,  was  no 
doubt  the  name  of  the  angel  who  was  said  to  have  com- 
municated the  revelation  contained  in  the  book.  It  claimed 
to  have  arisen  in  the  time  of  Trajan,  but  whether  truly  or  not 
is  matter  of  doubt.  The  greater  part  of  its  theological  con- 
ceptions reappear  in  the  Clementines,  and  will  there  be 
noticed ;  but  a  few  are  peculiar.  It  borrowed  from  Oriental 
sources  the  idea  of  a  Syzygy  or  sexual  duality  in  the  emana- 
tions from  the  supreme  Deity :  also  an  exaggerated  asceticism, 
especially  in  abstinence  from  wine  and  animal  food,  combined 
with  constant  lustral  washings,  though  these  may  be  rather 
taken  from  the  Essene  practice.  From  Christianity  it 
borrowed  the  rite  of  baptism,  which,  however,  it  emptied  of 

^  Our  chief  authority  is  Hippolytus,  Hser.  ix.  13.  That  writer's  ignor- 
ance of  Hebrew  led  him  to  regard  Elchasai  as  the  name  of  the  founder  of 
this  sect,  just  as  Ebion  was  held  to  have  founded  Ebionism. 


134  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

all  moral  significance,  making  it  a  mere  magical  process  of 
initiation  and  remission. 

This  sect  inculcated  the  practice  of  magic  and  astrology, 
and  seems  to  have  laid  great  stress  on  the  pro^^erties  of  num- 
bers. It  retained  from  Judaism  the  rite  of  circumcision  and 
the  recommendation  of  marriage,  differing  in  this  point  from. 
Essenism,  which  wholly  rejected  sexual  intercourse.  It  seems 
to  have  regarded  Christ  as  a  man,  though  it  admitted  His 
birth  of  a  virgin.  His  Messiahship  was  interpreted  in  con- 
nection with  the  Kabbalistic  theory  of  an  adam  kadmon,  or 
ideal  man,  who  had  reappeared  several  times  in  human  his- 
tory, first  as  Adam,  then  as  Moses,  and  finally  as  Jesus  of 
Nazareth. 

Besides  this  work,  other  smaller  productions  must  be  attri- 
buted to  this  sect,  notably  the  "  Ascents  of  James,"  which  will 
be  referred  to  later  on;  the  history  of  James  the  Lord's  brother, 
from  which  Lightfoot  thinks  the  curious  details  of  his  life 
and  martyrdom  given  by  Hegesippus^  are  derived;  and  a 
biography  of  S.  Matthew,  referred  to  by  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria,2  which  represented  him  as  having  abstained  from 
animal  food,  and  as  having  lived  in  the  desert  on  seeds, 
berries  and  herbs. 

In  the  first  half  of  the  third  century  these  heretics  seem 
to  have  attempted,  though  without  much  success,  to  propa- 
gate their  views.  We  learn  from  Hippolytus  that  one  Alci- 
biades  of  AjDamea  in  Syria  appeared  in  his  time  at  Eome, 
and  endeavoured  to  win  over  the  Pope  Callistus.  This  pre- 
late, whose  dogmatic  convictions,  if  he  had  any,  underwent 
several  changes,  and  were  always  made  subservient  to  his 
personal  interests,  seemed  inclined  to  lend  a  favourable  ear 
to  the  tempter.  But  Hippolytus  so  completely  exposed  the 
falsehood  of  the  system  that  the  danger  was  removed,  and 
we  hear  no  more  of  any  further  hesitation  on  the  part  of  the 
Pope.  The  ^proselytising  zeal  of  the  Elchasaites,  however, 
died  hard ;  for,  some  years  later,  a  fresh  emissary  propagated 
their  doctrines  in  Ceesarea,  where  he  was  confuted  by  Origen. 

The  importance  of  this  sect  has  been  unduly  exaggerated 
1  See  Book  HI.,  ch.  7.  ^  -p^^^g.  ii.  i  (p.  174,  Potter). 


EBIONISM.  135 

by  the  Church  historians  of  the  Tubingen  school.  Not  con- 
tent with  dividing  the  Apostolic  Church  into  two  hostile 
camps  of  Petrines  and  Paulines,  they  carry  the  antagonism 
far  into  the  second  century,  and  represent  Papias,  Hegesippus, 
as  well  as  a  strong  party  in  the  Palestinian,  African,  and 
Koman  churches,  as  Ebionite  and  anti-Pauline.  This  theory 
has  been  thoroughly  dealt  with  by  Lightfoot  in  his  essay  "  On 
S.  Paul  and  the  Three,"  and  its  baselessness  clearly  demon- 
strated.i  No  doubt  Ebionites  existed  even  as  late  as  the  close 
of  the  fourth  century,  not  only  in  the  east  of  Palestine,  but 
in  many  of  the  great  cities  of  the  Empire.  But  within  a  short 
period  after  this  they  seem  to  have  been  absorbed  either  into 
the  Catholic  Church  or  into  the  Jewish  Synagogue;  most 
probably  into  the  latter. 

1  In  his  edition  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  The  writer  has  freely 
used  this  essay,  among  other  authorities.  While  admitting  the  conclusive- 
ness of  the  bishop's  argument,  he  thinks  that  it  hardly  lays  sufficient  stress 
on  the  signs  of  sympathy  shown  by  S.  James  towards  those  who  misunder- 
stood S.  Paul  (Acts  xxi.  18  sqq.;  cf.  Gal.  ii.  12  >--qq.).  The  treatment  of  the 
antithesis  of  faith  and  works  in  James  ii.  i/s^sqq.  points  in  the  same  direction. 
It  is  clear  that  from  an  early  period  in  S.  Paul's  career  the  so-called  "  party 
of  James  "  confused  or  identified  his  vindication  of  Gentile  liberty  with  a 
claim  for  the  immunity  of  Jewish  converts  from  the  observance  of  the 
Law.  This  latter  is  certainly  taught  by  the  Apostle,  but  it  is  not  in  ques- 
tion in  the  Acts.  No  doubt  it  was  the  suspicion  of  this  doctrine  which 
led  to  the  calumny  that  Paul  was  no  true  Pharisee,  but  a  Gentile  proselyte. 
This  explains  his  emphatic  and  reiterated  assertion  of  his  Jewish  extrac- 
tion and  antecedents.     See  Acts  xxii.  2,  xxiii.  6,  xxvi.  5. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE  CLEMENTINE  LITERATURE. 

The  great  name  and  high  authority  of  S.  Clement  were  used 
in  the  century  succeeding  his  death  to  give  currency  to  various 
theories  and  legends,  which  appeared  in  numerous  forms,  ex- 
ternally differing,  but  animated  by  a  tolerably  uniform  spirit, 
and  which  had  sufficient  plausibility  to  pass  for  genuine  in 
the  uncritical  ages  of  the  Church.  They  are  now  universally 
admitted  to  be  wholly  devoid  of  historical  accuracy,  though 
of  the  greatest  possible  interest  and  importance  to  the  student 
of  the  early  development  of  Catholic  doctrine.  They  are 
known  by  the  general  name  of  "The  Clementines,"  and 
include  two  long  treatises,  the  Homilies  and  Recognitions,  the 
Epistle  to  James,  the  Epitome  of  the  Acts  of  S.  Peter  in  two 
forms,  and  the  Martyrdom  of  S.  Clement,  both  which  last  are 
much  later  and  entirely  untrustworthy  documents.^ 

The  method  in  which  the  subjects  are  treated  is  in  sub- 
stance biographical.  Clement  is  introduced  as  the  narrator ; 
and  he  interweaves  with  the  story  of  his  own  life  an  exposi- 
tion of  the  Christian  faith,  clothed  with  the  authority  of  S. 
Peter,  whose  intimate  companion  he  is  represented  to  have 
been.  In  the  earliest  form  of  the  work,  which  scholars  are 
almost  unanimous  in  thinking  is  now  lost,  the  element  of 
doctrinal  exposition  and  polemics  was  j)redominant,  the  narra- 
tive portions  being  only  the  framework  in  which  the  former 
was  set.  But,  as  time  went  on,  the  story  grew  more  popular, 
and  the  somewhat  dry  disquisitions  gradually  came  to  occupy 

1  To  these  may  be  added  a  short  Epistle  of  S.  Peter  to  S.  James  of 
Jerusalem,  and  a  testimonium  or  authentication  of  the  same  attached. 
The  Epistle  of  Clement  to  James  is  prefixed  as  a  kind  of  introduction  to 
the  Homilies. 

136 


THE  CLEMENTINE  LITERATURE.  137 

the  second  place,  until  in  the  Epitome  they  are  to  a  great  ex- 
tent sacrificed,  and  the  whole  interest  centres  in  the  story. 

The  two  fuller  accounts  (the  Recognitions  and  Homilies 
respectively)  agree  in  their  main  features  and  in  most  of  the 
historical  details.  But  their  differences  are  almost  as  pro- 
nounced as  their  agreement.  The  twenty  Homilies,  which 
we  possess  in  the  original  Greek,  represent  with  considerable 
fidelity  the  theological  views  of  that  Ebionitic  sect  from  which 
the  work  emanated.  The  Recognitions,  of  which  only  the 
translation  by  Rufinus  is  extant,  is  a  production  of  greater 
literary  merit,  and  has  softened  down  many  of  the  most 
unpalatable  aberrations  from  doctrinal  orthodoxy.  This 
may  be  partly  due  to  Rufinus,  who  is  generally  as  a  trans- 
lator more  careful  to  guard  the  orthodoxy  of  his  original  than 
to  render  the  exact  words.  But  since  he  assures  us  in  this 
case  that  he  has  been  content  to  act  as  a  faithful  translator, 
we  may  assume  that  the  wide  demand  for  the  work  had  pro- 
duced a  revised  edition  free  from  the  gravest  objections  of 
the  earlier  production.  As  to  the  comparative  priority  of 
the  two  recensions,  opinions  are  equally  divided  ;  but  on  the 
whole  it  seems  preferable  to  decide  with  Lightfoot  that  the 
Homilies  are  the  earlier.  It  is  true,  no  doubt,  that  their 
narrative  portions  contain  some  inconsistencies  which  do  not 
appear  in  the  Recognitions,  but  these  may  be  explained  by 
the  feebler  interest  felt  in  them  by  the  writer  as  compared 
with  the  polemical  discussions. 

Before  criticising  the  origin,  merits  and  date  of  these  com- 
positions, it  will  be  well  to  give  our  readers  an  outline  of  the 
story,  which  may  fitly  be  described  as  the  earliest  precursor 
of  the  modern  religious  romance. 

The  Autobiography  of  Clement  of  Rome. 

Clement,  the  hero  of  this  picturesque  story,  informs  his 
correspondent,  S.  James,  of  the  main  events  in  his  life.  He 
states  that  he  was  born  of  a  noble  Roman  family,  closely  con- 
nected with  that  of  the  Emperor.  From  his  earliest  youth 
he  had  devoted  himself  to  the  pursuit  of  virtue,  and  more 


138  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

especially,  of  chastity.  He  had  sought  counsel  from  the  lead- 
ing professors  of  wisdom,  and  had  plunged  deep  into  the 
most  abstruse  sciences,  but  only  to  find  his  higher  aspirations 
still  unsatisfied  and  a  gloomy  despair  settling  upon  his  soul. 
A  report  had  reached  his  ears  of  a  Great  Preacher  of  truth 
who  had  appeared  in  Galilee  ;  and  rumour  declared  that  one 
of  His  disciples,  named  Barnabas,  was  actually  teaching  in 
Rome.  Clement  sought  him  out,  and  heard  him  address 
one  of  his  missionary  discourses  to  a  large  crowd ;  this  so 
touched  the  young  inquirer's  heart  that  he  offered  the  Apostle 
his  friendship,  which  was  graciously  accepted.  In  a  few 
days  Barnabas  left  Rome  for  Palestine,  whither  Clement, 
unable  to  rest  without  a  fuller  knowledge  of  the  truth, 
determined  to  follow  him.i  At  C^esarea  he  was  introduced 
to  S.  Peter,  and  this  introduction  was  the  turning-point  of 
Clement's  life. 

It  so  happened  that  the  most  persistent  enemy  of  the 
Gospel,  Simon  the  magician,  was  also  at  Csesarea.  This 
gave  occasion  for  arranging  a  public  discussion  between  the 
true  and  the  false  apostle.  Peter  occupies  the  interval  of  pre- 
paration in  teaching  Clement  the  chief  mysteries  of  the  faith, 
and  bidding  him  transmit  a  written  account  of  his  instruction 
to  James  of  Jerusalem,  to  whom  Peter  himself  was  required 
to  send  an  annual  report  of  his  mission  work.^  Meanwhile, 
Peter's  controversial  armoury  is  strongly  reinforced  by  the 

1  In  the  Homilies,  Clement  first  meets  Barnabas  at  Alexandria,  from 
whence  he  sails  for  Judea.  Both  accounts  agree  in  making  Clement  meet 
Peter  at  Caesarea. 

2  It  has  been  pointed  out  that  there  are  several  discrepancies  in  this 
account,  which  seem  to  indicate  it  as  a  recension  of  some  earlier  document. 
This  may  have  been  the  "Ascents  of  James"  {ava jSadfiol  'IaKw/3ou),  which 
contained  a  narrative  of  the  conflicts  between  the  Apostles  and  the  Jewish 
leaders  on  the  Temple  steps  (whence  the  name)  ;  when  an  enemy  who  is 
not  named,  but  is  undoubtedly  Saul  of  Tarsus,  raises  a  tumult  and  hurls 
James  down  the  steps,  lea\dng  him  for  dead.  The  Apostles  flee  to  Jericho, 
carrying  James  with  them.  While  here,  James,  who  has  the  chief  autho- 
rity in  the  Jerusalem  Church,  hears  of  the  mischief  done  by  Simon  at 
Caesarea,  and  sends  Peter  down  to  confute  him.  The  dates  in  the  Recog- 
nitions are  confused.  Clement  first  speaks  of  our  Lord  as  still  preach- 
ing when  he  first  met  Barnabas  ;  but  afterwards  he  fixes  the  date  of 
his  meeting  with  Peter  as  seven  years  after  the  crucifixion. 


THE  CLEMENTINE   LITERATURE.  139 

desertion  to  him  of  two  of  Simon's  most  trusted  disciples, 
Nicetas  and  Aquila,  who,  by  revealing  the  secret  villanies 
by  which  the  magician's  fame  is  purchased,  supply  the 
Apostle  with  information  of  the  most  damaging  kind.  The 
discussion  takes  place  before  a  large  audience,  and  lasts  three 
days.  Simon  is  vanquished  in  argument,  and  put  to  shame 
by  an  exposure  of  his  necromantic  arts.  Full  of  malice,  he 
departs  for  Eome,  and  traduces  the  character  of  Peter  at 
every  halting-place  on  the  road.  Peter  finds  it  necessary  to 
follow  him  from  city  to  city,  but  before  he  leaves  he  ordains 
the  ex-publican  Zacchgeus  as  Bishop,  and  baptizes  over  ten 
thousand  converts.  Clement  is  selected  as  Peter's  personal 
attendant  and  confidential  secretary,  evidently  as  a  set-off  to 
the  position  assigned  by  S.  Paul  to  S.  Luke. 

After  stoj)pages  at  Dora,  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Berytus,  a  halt 
is  made  at  Tripolis  in  Phoenicia,  where,  among  other  note- 
worthy events,  Clement  receives  baptism,  and  is  then  for 
the  first  time  allowed  to  join  the  Apostle  at  meals.^  While 
at  Aradus,  Clement,  encouraged  by  the  paternal  kindness  of 
S.  Peter,  confides  to  him  the  story  of  the  family  troubles. 
He  relates  that  his  father,  Faustinianus,  whose  wife  was  the 
high-born  and  virtuous  Matthidia,  had  three  sons,  Faustus 
and  Faustinus,  twins,  and  Clement,  who  was  several  years 
younger.  When  Clement  was  about  five  years  old,  he  remem- 
bered that  his  mother  had  a  dream,  warning  her  of  some 
impending  calamity,  which  could  only  be  avoided  by  her 
leaving  Eome.  Her  husband  consented  to  the  separation, 
and  sent  her  with  the  twins  to  Athens.  At  the  expiration 
of  a  year  a  messenger  was  despatched  to  inquire  after  their 
welfare,  but  he  never  returned.  Other  messengers  were 
sent,  but  all  that  could  be  learnt  was  that  the  ship  in  which 
Matthidia  sailed  had  never  arrived  at  Athens.  Unable  to 
endure  the  continued  suspense,  Faustinianus  left  Clement 
under  the  care  of  guardians,  and  set  out  to  seek  for  the  lost 
ones.     This  happened  in  Clement's  early  boyhood,  and  since 

^  Observe  the  importance  attached  to  this  mark  of  comradeship  ;  and 
compare  it  with  S.  Paul's  account  of  S.  Peter's  conduct  in  the  second 
chapter  of  the  Galatians. 


I40  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

then  he  had  heard  nothing  of  his  father  or  mother,  and  had 
given  them  both  up  for  dead. 

The  AjDostle  listened  to  this  story  with  affectionate  interest, 
and  an  expedition  being  jDroposed  to  the  neighbouring  isle 
of  Antaradus,  he  consented  to  join  the  party.  While  seated 
on  the  steps  of  a  temple,  he  fell  into  conversation  with  a 
beggar-woman,  who  related  the  story  of  her  life,  which 
exactly  corresponded  with  Clement's  narrative  of  what  had 
befallen  his  mother.  It  was  no  other  than  Matthidia  herself, 
who  was  thus  happily  restored  to  her  youngest  son;  and 
shortly  afterwards,  at  Laodicea,  she  found  in  Nicetas  and 
Aquila  the  two  twins  whom  she  believed  to  have  been  lost 
in  the  shipwreck.  The  story  is  gracefully  interwoven  with 
references  to  many  New  Testament  characters,  among  whom 
is  Justa,  the  Syrophenician  woman.  Matthidia,  after  due 
preparation,  is  baptized  by  Peter  in  the  sea. 

On  the  following  day  the  Apostle,  while  ^Draying  on  the 
shore,  was  addressed  by  an.  old  man,  meanly  dressed  but  of 
refined  bearing,  who  expostulated  with  him  on  the  useless- 
ness  of  prayer.  Peter  asked  the  reason  of  this  unbelief. 
The  old  man  replied  that  all  things  were  governed  by  astro- 
logical necessity  or  fate  {Genesis).  Peter,  being  unversed 
in  the  subtleties  of  the  schools,  proposed  that  his  three  young 
friends  should  discuss  the  subject  with  the  old  man,  and,  if 
possible,  convince  him  of  error.  A  long  debate  follows,  in 
which  Nicetas  treats  the  objections  of  philosophy,  Aquila 
those  of  physical  science,  and  Clement  those  of  mathematics 
and  astrology.  The  old  man  was  unable  to  answer  their 
arguments,  but  he  maintained  the  truth  of  his  own  views  as 
resting  not  upon  theory,  but  on  the  irrefragable  evidence  of 
his  life's  experience.  He  stated  that  his  wife's  birth  had 
taken  place  under  a  conjunction  of  the  stars  that  foreboded 
conjugal  infidelity  and  great  subsequent  misfortunes.  In 
spite  of  her  naturally  virtuous  disposition,  she  had  been 
guilty  of  adultery  with  a  slave  (a  fact  which  he  had  learned 
from  the  evidence  of  his  brother),  and  had  feigned  to  have 
received  a  divine  communication  bidding  her  leave  Eome, 
as  a  cloak  for  carrying  out  her  designs.     The  ship  in  which 


THE   CLEMENTINE   LITERATURE.  141 

she  and  her  two  sons,  together  with  her  paramour,  sailed 
for  Athens  had  been  lost,  and  he  himself,  wearied  with  the 
miseries  of  life,  had  determined  to  drag  out  the  wretched 
remnant  of  his  days  as  an  unknown  outcast.  Peter  at  once 
perceived  that  the  old  man  was  he  whose  death  they  had  all 
mourned,  the  long-lost  Faustinianus.  He  not  only  had  the 
happiness  of  reuniting  him  to  his  family,  but  was  able  to 
convince  him  of  his  wife's  innocence,  and  of  the  consequent 
falsity  of  the  astrological  prediction.  The  old  man's  preju- 
dices at  last  gave  way,  and,  fully  satisfied  of  his  own 
grievous  mistakes,  he  professed  himself  willing  to  be  taught 
the  truth. 

Meanwhile  Simon  had  not  been  idle.  Full  of  bitter  hatred 
against  Peter,  he  had  gone  to  Antioch  and  denounced  him 
as  an  impostor  and  a  magician.  But  Peter  had  despatched 
some  Christian  envoys  to  watch  his  movements,  one  of  whom 
hit  on  the  expedient  of  applying  to  Cornelius  (the  Centurion 
of  the  Acts),  who  was  then  at  Caesarea,  to  set  in  motion  the 
edict  of  the  Emperor,  by  which  all  sorcerers  were  ordered 
to  be  seized  and  sent  to  punishment.  Simon  in  alarm  fled 
to  Laodicea,  where  Faustinianus  met  him  at  the  residence  of 
some  common  friends,  Apion  (or  Appion),  the  celebrated 
grammarian,  and  Anubion,  a  Syrian  rhetorician.  Having 
heard  of  the  relations  between  Faustinianus  and  Peter,  Simon 
determined  to  revenge  himself  on  both  of  them.  He  invited 
Faustinianus  to  a  banquet,  and  gave  him  a  drugged  potion 
which  had  the  effect  of  transforming  his  features  into  those 
of  the  magician.  Meanwhile  Simon  escajDed,  and  left  Fausti- 
nianus to  be  apprehended  in  his  stead.  The  old  man,  igno- 
rant of  his  change  of  form,  rejoined  the  Apostle  and  his 
companions.  The  latter  turned  from  him  with  horror ;  but 
Peter  was  not  to  be  deceived  by  Simon's  arts.  Instantly 
recognising  what  had  taken  place,  he  turned  it  to  Simon's 
disadvantage  by  sending  Faustinianus  to  Antioch,  and  in- 
structing him,  while  still  wearing  Simon's  features,  to  appear 
in  public  and  make  a  full  confession  of  his  villanies.  This 
he  did  to  such  good  purpose  that  the  populace,  fickle  in  love 
as  in  hate,  turned  against  him,  and  would  have  slain  him, 


142  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

had  he  not  been  assisted  to  escape  by  some  Christian  brethren 
who  were  in  the  secret.  When  Simon  appeared  shortly 
afterwards,  he  was  received  with  derision,  and  Peter,  on  his 
arrival  at  Antioch,  was  welcomed  as  the  bearer  of  a  divine 
message.  Faustinianus  was  restored  to  his  true  shape,  and 
received  baj^tism  at  the  Apostle's  hands. 

This  incident  concludes  the  original  story.  A  Letter  from 
Clement  to  James  of  Jerusalem,  purporting  to  be  written 
from  Eome  shortly  before  Peter's  martyrdom,  gives  an 
account  of  Clement's  consecration  as  Bishop  of  Eome  by 
Peter.  The  Apostle,  who  is  described  in  exalted  terms  as 
having  carried  the  light  of  the  Gospel  into  the  whole  Western 
World,  knowing  that  his  end  was  near,  called  together  the 
elders  of  the  Church,  and  announced  that  he  had  chosen  Cle- 
ment to  be  his  successor.  Clement  earnestly  deprecated  the 
unwelcome  honour ;  but  Peter  was  firm,  and,  in  the  presence 
of  the  whole  Church,  ordained  him  Bishop,  giving  him  in- 
structions how  to  behave  in  his  office,  and  enjoining  upon  the 
priests  and  deacons  implicit  obedience  to  their  superior.  The 
expression  "  Eye  of  the  Bishop  "  ^  is  applied  to  the  Diaconate 
in  this  letter,  in  which  also  occurs  the  beautiful  comparison 
of  the  Church  to  a  ship,  of  which  so  much  use  has  been  made 
by  succeeding  writers.  The  passage,  which  is  worth  tran- 
scribing as  a  specimen  of  the  style  of  the  Clementines,  is 
as  follows : — 

"The  whole  framework  of  the  Church  is  like  to  a  great  ship, 
which  carries  through  a  mighty  storm  men  of  different  lands,  all 
desiring  to  dwell  in  the  city  of  a  good  kingdom.  The  owner  of 
the  ship  is  God  Almighty :  Christ  is  the  Pilot,  the  man  at  the 
look-out  is  the  Bishop,  the  able  seamen  are  the  Presbyters,  the 
overseers  of  the  rowers  are  the  Deacons,  the  collectors  of  passage- 
money  are  the  catechists,  the  entire  multitude  of  the  brethren  are 
the  passengers;  the  world  is  the  sea,  the  adverse  winds  are 
temptations,  the  billows  are  persecutions :  the  words  of  seducers 
and  false  prophets  are  the  squalls  coming  down  from  the  moun- 
tain gorges  :  the  headlands  and  rough  places  are  the  magistrates 
who  threaten  death ;  the  shallows  and  counter-currents  are  those 

^  Now  applied  only  to  the  Archdeacon. 


THE  CLEMENTINE  LITERATURE.  143 

who  are  irrational  and  doubtful  of  the  promises  :  hypocrites  are 
like  to  pirates,  whirlpools  and  eddies  and  mortal  accidents  and 
capsizings  may  fitly  be  compared  to  sins." 

The  Epitome,  as  has  already  been  mentioned,  gives  in  an 
abridged  form  the  points  of  the  foregoing  history.  The 
original  portion  of  it  ends  with  the  147th  chapter,  where 
the  full  title  of  the  work,  "  Clement's  Epitome  of  the  travels 
and  preaching  of  Peter,"  ^  is  given.  To  this  an  appendix 
is  added,  carrying  on  the  biography  of  the  Bishop  to  his 
martyrdom,  and  relating  the  wonders  that  were  wrought  at 
his  tomb.  Eloquent  testimony  is  given  to  the  liberal  and 
generous  character  of  Clement,  whose  intellectual  culture 
enabled  him  to  sympathise  alike  with  Jews  and  Gentiles  in 
their  difficulties.  His  episcopate  was  eminently  successful 
in  conciliating  opposition,  and  his  munificence  endeared  him 
to  the  poor.  But  his  virtues  did  not  shield  him  from  the 
malice  of  enemies.  A  friend  of  the  Emperor  Nerva,  named 
Sisinnius,  enraged  at  the  influence  of  Clement's  teaching  over 
his  wife  Theodora,  determined  to  put  her  to  shame  and  to 
annoy  Clement  in  the  very  act  of  public  worship.  Entering 
the  church  with  some  of  his  attendants,  he  looked  about  for  his 
wife,  intending  to  carry  her  off  by  force.  But  while  Clement 
was  offering  the  opening  prayer,  Sisinnius  was  suddenly 
smitten  with  deafness  and  blindness.  Neither  he  nor  his 
attendants  could  find  the  door,  and  they  were  fain  to  accept 
the  guidance  of  Theodora,  who  escorted  them  home.  Clement 
visited  the  unhappy  man,  in  the  hope  of  softening  his  anger, 
but  was  repulsed  with  insults  and  threats.  Owing  to  his 
prayers,  however,  Sisinnius  next  day  came  to  a  better  mind, 
and  confessed  his  injustice.  His  repentance  was  accepted, 
and  a  complete  reconciliation  took  place.  But  the  magis- 
trates, terrified  at  the  Bishop's  influence,  preferred  against 
him  a  charge  of  magic  and  sedition,  and  prevailed  on  the 
prefect  Mamertinus  to  report  him  to  the  Emperor.  Trajan, 
who  was  now  on  the  imperial  throne,  gave  orders  that 
Clement  should  either  sacrifice  to  the  gods  or  be  banished 

^  K\r]/J.evTOS  tov  Herpov  e-md-qixiwv  re  /cat  KTjpvyfxdTWP  eirLTOfx-q. 


T44  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

immediately  to  the  Crimea.  The  Bishop's  constancy  over- 
came Mamertinus,  who  grieved  bitterly  for  his  own  injustice 
in  procuring  his  condemnation.  It  was,  however,  too  late  to 
save  him.  He  was  exiled  to  the  barren  shores  of  the  Cher- 
sonese, and  by  his  gentleness  so  wrought  upon  the  inhabitants 
that  nearly  all  were  converted  to  the  faith.  On  learning  this, 
Trajan  sent  a  bigoted  heathen  named  Aufidianus  to  assume 
the  government  of  the  territory.  After  many  acts  of  cruel 
persecution,  this  Aufidianus  determined  to  destroy  Clement 
as  the  only  means  of  checking  the  growth  of  the  Church,  and 
threw  him  into  the  sea  with  an  anchor  tied  round  his  neck, 
to  prevent  the  faithful  from  gaining  possession  of  his  relics. 

But,  at  the  prayer  of  two  of  Clement's  disciples,  the  sea 
receded  and  left  the  body  ex^DOsed.  It  was  revealed  to  these 
two  men  that  the  corpse  must  be  left  where  it  was,  and  a 
small  shrine  erected  over  it  in  the  sea.  This  was  done,  and 
the  miraculous  retirement  of  the  water  took  place  every  year, 
lasting  for  seven  days,  when  an  annual  festival  was  held  in 
honour  of  the  saint.  On  one  of  these  occasions  a  man  of 
good  family,  who  had  entered  the  shrine  with  his  wife  and 
little  son,  by  some  accident  left  the  boy  behind,  and  when 
the  waters  advanced,  he  was  found  to  be  missing.  Over- 
whelmed with  grief,  the  parents  came  to  the  spot  the  follow- 
ing year,  expecting  to  find  the  corpse  of  their  son ;  but, 
wondrous  to  relate,  they  had  no  sooner  entered  the  shrine 
than  the  boy  met  them,  alive  and  well,  God  ha^dng  provided 
this  striking  testimony  to  the  sanctity  of  the  holy  bishop, 
who,  even  in  death,  was  permitted  to  minister  comfort  to  the 
sorrowing,  and  to  strengthen  the  faith  of  believers. 

Such  is  the  celebrated  romance  of  the  Clementines,  a 
romance  which  for  ages  was  regarded  as  historically  true, 
and  which,  though  now  deservedly  discredited,  must,  from 
its  beauty,  always  hold  a  high  place  in  the  literature  of  the 
Church,  where  dogmatic  rigorism  does  not  step  in  to  blind 
our  judgment  to  the  many  excellences,  religious  and  artistic, 
which  adorn  it. 

We  now  proceed  to  offer  a  few  remarks  on  the  difficult 
questions  that  surround  the  origin  of  the  work.     Though 


THE  CLEMENTINE   LITERATURE.  145 

decidedly  Christian  in  tone,  it  is  obviously  far  from  ortho- 
dox. Three  important  departures  from  the  true  standpoint 
of  Catholic  doctrine  mar  its  religious  usefulness.  These  are — 
(i)  the  assumption  of  metaphysical  rather  than  spiritual  first 
principles,  which  necessitates  a  false  criticism  of  the  Old 
Testament ;  (2)  an  incorrect  theory  of  the  law,  and  inadequate 
views  of  the  Person  of  Jesus  Christ ;  (3)  a  falsification  of  his- 
torical justice  in  ignoring  the  work  of  S.  Paul  and  substitut- 
ing for  it  a  fictitious  apostleship  to  the  Gentiles  of  S.  Peter. 

As  to  the  first  defect,  it  is  shared  by  many  teachers  of  the 
Church,  such  as  Tatian,  Clement,  and  Origen.  But  while 
these  restrain  their  speculations  within  the  limits  of  revelation, 
the  Gnostic  thinkers,  from  whom  our  author  has  evidently 
borrowed,  acknowledged  no  such  necessity.  They  no  doubt 
felt  it  incumbent  on  them  to  make  their  views  appear  to  tally 
with  the  words  of  Scripture,  but  this  was  invariably  done  by 
wresting  the  sense  of  Scripture  into  conformity  with  their 
views.  In  a  sense,  therefore,  they  deserve  the  name  of  Biblical 
critics ;  but  their  criticism  is  arbitrary  and  a  priori,  and  sup- 
ported by  an  utterly  perverted  exegesis.  From  the  Scripture 
texts  quoted  as  misapplied  by  them  in  Irenaeus,  Hippolytus 
and  Tertullian,  we  can  understand  the  fallacy  of  their  method. 
Intolerant  of  authority,  impatient  of  verification,  they  found 
it  easiest  to  strike  out  as  an  interpolation  whatever  they  did 
not  approve.  And  this  is  the  critical  method  applied  by 
Marcion  to  the  New  Testament,  and  by  the  Clementine 
writer  to  the  Old. 

The  second  defect  is  the  one  which  touches  most  closely 
the  relation  of  this  book  to  the  Catholic  Church.  It  is  no 
mere  accident  in  the  system,  but  implies  a  carefully  con- 
structed and  ambitious  attempt  to  reconcile  three  divergent 
points  of  view,  that  of  the  Jew-Christian,  that  of  the  Gnostic- 
Ebionite,  and  that  of  the  Gentile-Christian. 

The  fundamental  conciliatory  idea  is  that  of  a  simple  and 
original  religion,  divinely  revealed,  as  the  common  source  of 
Judaism  and  Christianity.  And,  inasmuch  as  the  primal  man, 
or  Protoplast,  was  the  ancestor  of  Gentiles  also,  this  original 
religion  explains  all  that  is  true  in  the  Gentile  faiths.    There  is 

K 


146  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

a  distinct  trace  of  Platonism  in  the  theory  of  the  heavenly  man 
or  Divine  Idea  of  humanity,  of  whom  the  earthly  Adam  was 
an  adumbration ;  and  in  general,  the  relation  of  the  Divine 
to  the  material  is  conceived  in  a  semi-Platonic  sense.  Thus 
the  writer,  holding  the  threads  of  many  discordant  points  of 
view,  twists  them  together  at  their  source,  and  out  of  the 
mass  of  doctrines  educes  his  conce^Dtion  of  a  True  Prophet, 
manifested  at  intervals  throughout  the  history  of  the  world, 
whom  Jews  and  Gentiles  alike  can  recognise  as  speaking 
with  the  authority  of  God. 

The  first  embodiment  of  this  prophetic  power  was  Adam, 
the  story  of  whose  fall  must  be  regarded  as  an  unauthorised 
interpolation  of  the  Scripture  record.  Had  his  posterity  only 
kept  true  to  his  primeval  doctrine,  the  Jews  would  have  had 
no  need  of  Moses,  nor  the  world  of  Christ.  It  was  the  de- 
scendants of  Adam  who  fell  away,  not  Adam  himself.  The 
writer  admits  the  Pentateuch  to  be  the  nearest  approach  to 
an  authentic  deposit  of  revelation,  but  he  strongly  contests 
the  common  view  of  its  genuineness,  affirming  that  it  was 
subjected  to  many  recensions,  and  that  the  original  revelation 
was  often  falsified  or  overlaid. 

The  tests  of  True  Prophecy  are  first  clearness,  then  con- 
sistency, then  spirituality.  All  that  fails  to  fulfil  these  condi- 
tions he  ruthlessly  casts  away.  All  oracles  that  are  obscure, 
veiled,  or  mystical,  must  be  false.  All  oracles  that  contradict 
the  distinct  assertions  of  the  Pentateuch  must  be  differently 
explained  or  rejected.  All  carnal  or  outward  delineations  of 
Messiah's  Kingdom,  especially  those  Chiliastic  dreams  so  dear 
to  the  Hebrew-Christian,  must  be  sternly  suppressed.  He  is 
unable  to  rise  to  the  modern  concej)tion  of  a  progressive  reve- 
lation, with  successive  steps  of  ascending  spirituality.  Hence 
his  hard,  unsympathetic  treatment  of  many  parts  of  Scripture. 
He  thinks  the  written  books  were  given  to  men  as  a  test  of 
their  spiritual  discernment,  so  that  the  spirit  that  is  truly 
Christian  can  by  an  instinctive  insight  tell  what  to  accept 
and  what  to  reject.  The  spiritual  man  will  refuse  to  accept 
anything  that  contradicts  the  metaphysical  idea  of  God.  The 
godly  nature  is  the  medium  in  which  the  inward  revelation 


THE  CLEMENTINE   LITERATURE.  147 

of  the  Divine  is  effected.  This  inward  revelation  is  superior 
to  that  by  visions,  angelic  appearances,  or  dreams,  which  are 
external,  and  presuppose  estrangement  from  God. 

The  highest  prophetic  type  is  Moses.  To  him  the  Almighty 
spoke  face  to  face,  as  a  man  speaks  to  his  friend.  The  doctrine 
of  Christ  is  at  bottom  but  a  restatement  of  that  of  Moses, 
which  had  been  lost  sight  of  by  all  but  a  few  Jews,  and  by 
the  whole  mass  of  the  Gentile  world.  Hence  it  was  neces- 
sary that  the  Supreme  Father  should  manifest  Himself  in 
the  person  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  to  recall  His  faithful  ones 
to  the  original  form  of  their  religion.  He  came  to  extend 
the  blessing  of  a  true  Law,  once  confined  to  Israel,  to  all 
mankind.  In  Jesus  the  spiritual  Jew  witnessed  a  new 
manifestation  of  that  first  Adam,  whom  he  had  constantly 
revered  as  the  source  of  all  that  was  noble  in  humanity. 

The  question  might  be  asked — In  what  respect,  then,  is 
the  Christian  position  an  advance  upon  the  Jewish  ?  What 
need  is  there  for  a  believer  in  Moses  to  change  his  faith  at 
all  ?  And  the  Clementine  writer  does  not  shrink  from  assert- 
ing that  such  a  change  is  wholly  unnecessary.  The  work 
of  Christ  is  mainly  to  shed  fresh  light  upon  misapprehended 
truth,  and  to  extend  the  plan  of  salvation  from  Jew  to 
Gentile.  It  does  not  in  any  way  affect  those  who  have  under- 
stood and  accepted  the  Mosaic  law  in  its  purity.  He  who 
possesses  the  true  faith  of  Moses  must  not,  indeed  he  cannot, 
blaspheme  Christ ;  on  the  other  hand,  a  Christian  need  not 
submit  to  the  Mosaic  ordinances,  though  he  must  not  slight 
or  condemn  them. 

This  view  of  Christ  as  the  True  Prophet  and  second  Law- 
giver, the  resuscitator  of  lost  truths,  harmonises  with  the 
general  position  of  the  Essenes,  though  the  Clementine 
author  goes  far  beyond  them  in  his  unsparing  excision  of 
Pentateuchal  precepts. 

The  third  defect  that  we  noticed  in  this  book  was  the 
unjust  estimate  of  S.  Paul  and  his  work.  In  defiance  of 
history,  S.  Peter  is  pourtrayed  not  only  as  the  Apostle  of  the 
Gentiles,  but  as  the  mouthpiece  of  abstruse  metaphysical  theo- 
ries.    Great  care  is  taken  to  emphasise  his  strict  observance 


148  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

of  lustral  washings,  of  vegetable  diet,  of  the  custom  of 
greeting  the  sunrise,  and  other  Essene  practices  ;  while  his 
conciliatory  attitude  towards  the  rival  Judaic  and  Gentile 
forms  of  Christianity,  though  founded  on  a  historical  basis, 
is  grossly  perverted. 

In  the  same  spirit,  we  trace  throughout  an  overdrawn  pic- 
ture of  the  character  and  position  of  S.  James.  Not  only  is 
he  the  suj)reme  ruler  of  the  Church  in  Jerusalem,  but  he  is 
the  bishop  of  bishops,  the  president  of  the  apostolic  college, 
and  the  highest  authority  in  the  Church  Catholic  throughout 
the  world.  He  directs  S.  Peter  in  his  missionary  enterprises, 
commands  him  to  send  in  a  full  annual  report  of  his  doings, 
as  well  as  a  shorter  summary  every  seven  years.  Clement's 
narrative  is  addressed  to  him,  and  he  himself  is  declared  to 
have  derived  his  unique  position  directly  from  the  hands  of 
Christ. 

On  the  other  hand,  S.  Paul  and  his  labours  are  never  once 
mentioned,  and  to  the  reader  who  can  read  between  the  lines 
there  is  not  only  an  ignoring  of  his  work,  but  a  constant 
undercurrent  of  disparagement  of  it.  The  theory  of  Baur 
that  this  disparagement  is  the  main  purpose  of  the  treatise, 
and  that  S.  Paul  is  intended  throughout  by  Simon  Magus,  is 
indeed  not  without  plausibility ;  but  his  idea  that  it  emanated 
from  the  Petrine  faction  within  the  Church  is  devoid  of  foun- 
dation. For,  if  it  was  necessary  for  a  churchman  to  veil  the 
personality  of  the  Apostle  under  a  pseudonym  so  unrecog- 
nisable as  Simon  Magus,  it  follows  that  the  j)ublic  for  whom 
he  wrote  was  not  the  powerful  section  of  Christendom  which 
on  any  showing  the  Petrine  party  must  have  been.  A  dis- 
tinction, however,  must  be  made  between  the  Homilies  and 
the  Recognitions.  The  former,  which  we  possess  in  the 
Greek,  shows  far  more  evident  traces  of  an  anti-Pauline 
spirit  than  the  latter,  which  we  possess  only  in  the  Latin 
version.  Yet  even  in  the  Homilies  it  seems  more  probable 
that  the  historical  Simon  is  kept  in  the  foreground,  and  that 
the  masked  allusions  to  S.  Paul  arise  from  time  to  time 
when  the  situation  seems  to  suggest  them.  There  can  be 
no  doubt,  for  instance,  of  the  applicability  to  S.  Paul  of  the 


THE  CLEMENTINE   LITERATURE.  149 

following  remonstrance  of   Peter,  professedly  addressed  to 
Simon : — 

"If  then  our  Jesus  was  made  known  to  thee  and  also  con- 
versed with  thee  in  a  vision,  He  was  angry  with  thee  as  an 
adversary,  and  therefore  He  spake  with  thee  by  visions  and 
dreams,  or  even  by  outward  revelations.  Can  any  one  be  made 
wise  unto  doctrine  by  visions  1  If  thou  sayest  he  can,  then  why 
did  the  Teacher  abide  and  converse  with  us  a  whole  year  when 
we  were  awake  ?  And  how  shall  we  ever  believe  that  He  was 
seen  of  thee,  when  thy  thoughts  are  contrary  to  His  teaching  ? 
If  having  been  seen  and  instructed  of  Him  for  a  single  hour, 
thou  wast  made  an  Apostle,  then  preach  His  words,  expound  His 
teaching,  love  His  Apostles,  do  not  fight  against  me^  His  com- 
panion. For  thou  hast  withstood  and  opposed  me,  the  firm  rock, 
the  foundation  of  the  Church.  If  thou  hadst  not  been  an  adver- 
sary, thou  would'st  not  have  reviled  and  calumniated  my  preach- 
ing, that  I  might  not  be  believed  when  I  told  what  I  had  heard 
myself  in  person  from  the  Lord,  as  though,  forsooth,  I  were  con- 
demned and  thou  wert  highly  regarded.  Nay,  if  thou  callest  me 
condemned,  thou  accusest  God,  who  revealed  Christ  in  me,  and 
assailest  Him  that  called  me  blessed  in  my  revelation."  ^ 

This  is  by  far  the  most  explicit  allusion  in  the  whole  work. 
Yet  even  this,  unquestionable  as  it  is,  may  well  have  passed 
undetected  by  the  untheological  reader.  Everything  j^oints 
to  an  uneasy  consciousness  on  the  writer's  part  that  he  is  not 
in  harmony  with  the  general  mind  of  the  Church :  conse- 
quently he  does  not  venture  beyond  the  region  of  innuendo 
and  negative  misrepresentation.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that, 
in  spite  of  its  currency  among  Catholics,  the  drift  of  the 
Recognitions,  and  still  more  of  the  Homilies,  is  wholly  Ebionite 
and  heretical.  The  charm  of  the  story  made  it  generally 
popular,  and  induced  orthodox  writers,  such  as  Rufinus,  to 
recast  it  in  a  more  or  less  expurgated  form.  This  is  clearly 
indicated  by  the  increasing  prominence  of  the  narrative  por- 
tion in  the  successive  editions.  In  the  lost  original,  critics 
are  of  opinion  that  the  doctrinal  disputations  held  the  chief 
place :  in  the  Homilies  they  are,  at  least,  equal  in  amount  to 

^  Horn.  xvii.  19.  Compare  Galatians  ii.  11.  See  Lightfoot,  Galat.  p.  315, 
ist  ed. 


150  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

the  biographical  sections;  in  the  Eecognitions,  the  story 
begins  to  assume  the  prominence,  and  in  the  E^^itome,^  it 
almost  monopolises  it. 

The  date  of  the  Clementines  has  been  much  discussed,  but 
cannot  be  determined  with  accuracy.  The  earliest  recension 
may  perhaps  be  placed  as  far  back  as  the  middle  of  the 
second  century,  and  the  form  in  which  they  at  present  exist 
as  somewhat  later.  The  jDlace  of  their  composition  is  also 
uncertain.  Milman  follows  the  majority  of  German  authorities 
in  affirming  their  Eoman  origin.  And  there  is  this  much 
in  favour  of  the  opinion,  that  they  evidently  desire  to  repre- 
sent themselves  as  such :  as  well  as  the  general  consideration 
that  Rome  was  the  meeting-point  of  all  heretical  philoso^^hies 
and  creeds.  But  the  local  colouring  of  both  works  is  so 
decidedly  Eastern  that  we  consider  Lightfoot's  view  far  more 
probable,  that  they  originated  in  Syria  or  the  adjoining 
regions,  very  possibly  in  Cgesarea. 

Space  forbids  us  to  discuss  more  fully  the  many  other 
interesting  topics  brought  forward  in  these  works,  such  as 
the  doctrine  of  successive  incarnations,  which  savours  of 
Indian  thought ;  the  theory  of  human  depravity  as  the  work 
of  fallen  angels;  the  catalogue  of  contradictory  moralities 
prevailing  among  different  tribes,  which  was  borrowed  from 
the  Greek  topographers  and  moral  theorists ;  the  fancy 
speeches  of  Apion  and  Anubion,  after  the  style  of  Plato's 
Symposium ;  the  satire  on  the  degradation  of  philosophers ; 
the  varied  picture  of  social  life.  A  translator  who  would 
treat  the  existing  Recognitions  as  Rufinus  probably  treated 
his  original,  omitting  the  more  tedious  and  objectionable 
discussions,  might  produce  a  book  even  now  quite  readable, 
and  of  a  more  popular  type  than  most  of  the  treatises  that 
have  come  down  to  us  from  the  great  Church  age. 

^  Besides  this  a  book  is  mentioned  by  Jerome,  called  the  "  Circuits  of 
Peter"  [irepLodoL  lierpov),  from  which  numerous  details  are  quoted  which 
reappear  in  the  Clementines,  e.g.,  Nicetas  and  Aquila,  Clement's  attend- 
ance on  Peter,  Peter's  attack  on  heathenism,  and  the  discourses  of  Apion 
and  Anubion  ;  but  apparently  it  said  nothing  about  the  restoration  of 
Clement  to  his  family. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE— GOSPELS 
AND  ACTS. 

Our  familiar  division  of  the  New  Testament  into  two  parts, 
adopted  for  convenience  of  reading  in  church,  corresponds  to 
a  real  difference  in  the  books  themselves.  The  four  Gospels, 
Acts,  and  Apocalypse,  are  simple  in  style  and  appeal  to  the 
mass  of  mankind ;  the  Epistles  are  hortatory  or  argumenta- 
tive, and  appeal  to  the  educated. 

Now  it  is  to  this  latter  category  that  nearly  all  the  extant 
literature  of  the  early  Church  belongs.  It  is  emphatically 
a  literature  of  teachers,  and  rulers,  and  dialecticians,  and 
learned  men ;  it  is  as  emphatically  not  a  popular  literature. 
There  are  indeed  some  exceptions.  The  DidacJU,  the  Shep- 
herd of  Hermas,  the  works  of  Papias  and  Hegesippus,  and 
in  a  different  way  the  Clementine  writings,  contain  a 
large  popular  element.  But  they  are  the  exceptions  that 
prove  the  rule.  Their  credit  did  not  stand  high  with 
theologians  proper.  Considerable  authority  was  no  doubt 
awarded  them,  but  it  was  awarded  grudgingly  and  without 
enthusiasm.  They  were  out  of  harmony  with  the  ruling 
tendency  of  Christian  thought,  which  was  towards  exposition 
and  metaphysical  argument.  And  this  tendency  increased 
with  each  succeeding  generation.  The  writings  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Fathers,  it  is  true,  put  no  severe  strain  upon  the  reader's 
attention.  They  are  far  less  difficult  to  follow  than  the 
Epistles  of  S.  Paul.  Nevertheless  they  undoubtedly  appeal  to 
an  educated  circle  of  believers,  not  to  the  uneducated  multi- 
tude. The  writer  to  Diognetus,  Justin  and  Iren^eus,  represent 
a  stage  still  further  removed  from  that  of  the  popular  con- 
sciousness.    Philosophic  ideas  and  dialectical  methods  mingle 


152  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

with  their  expositions  of  Christian  doctrine,  and  are  pursued 
for  the  most  part  through  long  and  elaborate  discussions, 
which  even  the  well-trained  student  finds  it  no  slight  tax 
upon  his  230wers  to  follow.  This  process  reaches  its  culmina- 
tion in  the  works  of  Clement  and  Origen,  which  demand 
from  the  reader  not  only  the  closest  attention,  but  familiarity 
with  a  wide  extent  of  heathen  as  well  as  Christian  learning, 
and  the  power  to  grasp  conceptions  at  once  recondite  and 
profound. 

In  the  African  school,  the  thoughts  are  somewhat  less 
difficult,  but  the  ambitious  rhetoric  in  which  they  are  con- 
veyed places  them  beyond  the  reach  of  the  undisciplined 
mind.  Even  granting  an  average  of  intelligence  fully  equal 
to  that  of  the  present  day,  it  is  impossible  to  believe  that 
such  works  as  those  of  Justin,  Origen,  or  Tertullian  could 
have  been  aj^preciated  or  even  understood  by  the  ordinary 
Christian  of  humble  life. 

Are  we  then  to  suppose  that  the  rank  and  file  of  believers 
were  entirely  without  a  23opular  religious  literature  ?  Were 
they  content  with  the  Gospels  and  such  oral  explanations  of 
doctrine  as  their  preachers  and  catechists  supplied  ?  Or  did 
any  writers  come  forward  and  endeavour  to  j)rovide  a  religious 
pabulum  suited  to  the  average  capacity  ? 

This  question,  so  natural,  so  easy  to  ask,  is  by  no  means 
easy  to  answer.  The  preface  to  S.  Luke's  Gospel  implies 
clearly  enough  that  evangelical  narratives  were  already 
numerous  in  his  day;  but  what  they  were,  and  in  what 
respects  they  differed  from  the  existing  Gospels,  we  have 
unfortunately  no  means  of  knowing.  Every  one  of  these 
early  records  has  perished,  and  except  a  few  doubtful  names 
and  a  score  or  two  of  almost  equally  doubtful  fragments,  we 
have  no  data  on  which  to  build  conjecture. 

But  early  in  the  second  century,  when  the  Church  was 
growing  in  numbers,  and  divergences  from  the  orthodox 
faith  arose,  it  seems  to  have  occurred  to  various  heretical 
teachers  that  the  surest  method  of  spreading  their  views  was 
to  compose  simple  narratives  on  the  plan  of  the  Gospels  and 
endeavour  to  pass  them  off  as  genuine  apostolic  literature. 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  153 

In  this  respect,  as  in  others,  they  showed  considerable 
sagacity.  An  age,  uncritical  in  temper  and  willing  to  bow 
before  the  authority  of  great  names,  might  easily  be  induced 
to  accept  such  documents  on  very  slender  evidence.  A 
predilection  for  plain  religious  reading,  especially  of  the 
biographical  sort,  has  always  been  a  characteristic  of  the 
mass  of  mankind.  Besides,  there  was  a  wide,  and,  as  it 
appeared,  legitimate  field  of  curiosity  in  the  gaps  left  by 
the  sacred  narrative.  Quite  apart  from  the  question  of 
orthodoxy,  every  Christian  would  be  glad  to  think  he  knew 
something  of  those  periods  in  the  life  of  our  Lord  and  His 
Apostles  on  which  the  Gospels  are  silent. 

The  information  given  in  the  Scriptures  is  indeed  ex- 
tremely full  as  regards  the  birth,  ministry,  death  and 
resurrection  of  Christ,  and  tolerably  so  as  to  the  movements 
of  S.  Peter  and  S.  Paul.  But  the  intervals  between  Christ's 
birth  and  baptism,  death  and  resurrection,  resurrection  and 
ascension,  to  say  nothing  of  the  careers  of  the  other  Apostles, 
are  so  cursorily  sketched  or  so  obscurely  hinted  at  as  to 
afford  the  most  natural  ground  of  curiosity,  and  almost  to 
challenge  the  invention  of  the  pious. 

To  these  causes  we  may  trace  the  chief  motive  of  Christian 
apocryphal  literature.  There  was,  however,  another  motive, 
which  has  recently  been  brought  into  unexpected  prominence 
by  the  discovery  of  the  lost  Apocalypse  of  Peter,  namely,  the 
desire  to  furnish  Christendom  with  a  clear  conception  of  the 
portion  of  believers  and  unbelievers  after  death,  a  subject 
already  partially  revealed  in  the  Apocalypse  of  S.  John, 
but  needing,  as  it  seemed,  a  fuller  and  more  comprehensive 
statement. 

In  criticising  this  literature,  we  propose,  for  the  sake  of 
clearness,  to  consider  it  under  three  heads.  Apocalypses, 
Apocryphal  Gospels,  and  Apocryphal  Acts.  The  origin  of 
them  all  is  in  the  main  heretical.  But  while  in  one  set  of 
documents  the  heretical  idea  was  prominent,  and  sought  to 
accredit  itself  by  the  fictitious  claim  to  an  apostolic  guarantee, 
in  another  it  was  merged  in  the  simple  desire  to  supj^ly  food 
for  the  popular  imagination,  in  which  it  was  so  successful  as 


154  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

to  win  for  its  jDroductions  not  only  widespread  popularity, 
but  the  acceptance  of  the  Church  itself,  in  whose  authorised 
teaching  they  were  gradually  and  permanently  incorporated. 

It  is  impossible,  at  least  in  the  primitive  period,  to  keep 
these  two  channels  distinct.  For  in  the  case  of  those  legends 
that  were  most  generally  accepted,  there  can  be  little  doubt 
that  the  original  documents  were  touched  and  retouched  by 
orthodox  hands,  all  uncatholic  elements  being  by  this  process 
eliminated ;  so  that  the  works  which  have  come  down  to  us 
are  in  scarcely  any  instance  preserved  in  their  original  form. 

It  is  remarkable  how  scrupulously  the  earliest  orthodox 
writers  resisted  the  temptation  to  invent  legend,  or  even  to 
give  literary  shape  to  legends  already  current.  Nearly  all 
the  specimens  of  this  literature  betray,  by  tendencies  incon- 
sistent with  the  primitive  faith,  an  origin  outside  the  orthodox 
circle.  The  only  exceptions  are  the  various  Acts  of  Martyr- 
dom. These  undoubtedly  rejDresent  a  type  of  literature  at 
once  popular  and  orthodox.  But  these,  again,  are  exceptions 
which  prove  the  rule.  For  they  are  entirely  concerned  with 
the  saints  of  the  post-apostolic  age,  and  never  profess  to  invest 
with  a  legendary  halo  any  features  in  the  life  of  our  Lord  or 
of  the  Twelve  Apostles.^ 

1.  Apocalyptic  Books— The  Apocalypse  of  Petep. 

Historians  have  remarked  that  under  stress  of  persecution 
or  extreme  spiritual  trial  the  religious  consciousness  tends  to 
express  itself  in  that  symbolic  and  imaginative  style  which 
we  call  Apocalyptic.  This  was  specially  the  case  with  the 
Jews  during  the  great  war  of  liberation  under  the  Macca- 
bees. And  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus,  and 
again  by  Hadrian,  the  same  tendency  reappeared,  and  was 
even  more  prolific  of  results.  Nor  was  it  wholly  unknown  in 
the  Christian  Church.  An  example  of  it  stands  imbedded 
in  the  New  Testament,  the  most  mysterious  and  disputed  of 

^  It  is  possible  that  the  correspondence  between  Christ  and  King 
Abgarus  of  Edessa  may  be  an  exception.  Eusebius  at  any  rate  seems  to 
accept  it  as  orthodox. 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  155 

the  writings  of  the  canon.  The  Revelation  of  S.  John  has 
ever  been  the  favourite  study  of  a  certain  class  of  theologians, 
to  whom  the  enigmatical  is  more  attractive  than  the  evident, 
and  historic  anticipation  more  congenial  than  inductive  re- 
search. 

To  us  this  wondrous  book  stands  apart  like  a  cloud-capped 
peak,  in  isolated  grandeur.  But  in  early  times  its  solitude 
was  shared  by  a  companion  somewhat  less  inscrutable,  if 
somewhat  less  authoritative,  bearing  on  its  title-page  the 
honoured  name  of  Peter. 

Until  last  year  this  work  was  known  only  by  a  few  paltry 
fragments  and  some  scattered  allusions.  But  quite  recently  the 
French  Archaeological  Mission  at  Cairo  have  published  three 
early  documents  of  first-rate  interest,  though  unfortunately 
incom23lete,  viz.,  parts  of  the  Book  of  Enoch,  of  the  Gospel 
of  S.  Peter,  and  of  what  is  universally  admitted  to  be  his 
Apocalypse.  Nearly  half  of  the  latter  is  preserved,  sufficient, 
that  is,  to  form  a  fair  estimate  of  its  value,  and  to  enable  us 
to  indicate  its  influence  on  succeeding  literature. 

We  begin  by  mentioning  the  chief  early  notices  of  this 
supposed  Petrine  work.  The  first  occurs  in  the  Muratorian 
fragment  on  the  canon  ^  (a.d.  170-200),  where,  according 
to  the  received  reading,  it  is  j^laced  among  the  Canonical 
Scriptures  along  with  the  Apocalypse  of  S.  John,  though 
with  the  qualifying  remark  that  some  members  of  the  Church 
objected  to  its  being  publicly  read.^ 

The  next  writer  who  mentions  it  is  Clement,  who,  accord- 
ing to  Eusebius,  commented  on  it  in  his  Hypotyposes,  and 
this  statement  is  confirmed  by  three  quotations  in  an  existing 
fragment  of  that  work,  one  of  which  speaks  of  it  as  Scripture. 

S.  Methodius  of  Olympus,  in  Lycia  (a.d.  300),  also  quotes 
one  of  these  j)assages,  and  says  that  it  comes  from  "  divinely 
inspired  writings." 

1  See  Book  III.,  ch.  10. 

^  "Apocalypses  etiam  lohannis  et  Petri  tantum  recipimus,  quam  quidam 
ex  nostris  legi  in  ecclesia  nolunt."  Zahn  imagines  a  lacuna  after  "  Petri " 
of  the  following  sort :  *'  Unam  epistolam,  quam  tantum  recipimus  ;  altera 
extat  epistola,"  &c.     But  this  is  a  somewhat  arbitrary  change. 


156  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

Eusebius,  a  little  later,  includes  it  in  a  list  of  the  Petrine 
writings  with  these  cautious  words,  "  The  book  (so-called) 
of  his  Acts,  and  the  (so-called)  Gospel  according  to  Peter, 
and  what  is  known  as  his  Preaching,  and  what  is  called  his 
Apocalypse,  these  we  know  not  at  all  as  having  been  handed 
down  among  Catholic  Scriptures,  for  no  ancient  Church 
writer  nor  contemporary  of  our  own  has  made  use  of  testi- 
monies taken  from  them."  ^  In  the  face  of  the  citations  from 
Clement  and  Methodius  this  last  statement  cannot  be  called 
correct,  nor  can  the  former  be  reconciled  with  the  present 
text  of  the  Muratorian  fragment.  In  another  passage  Euse- 
bius  classes  it  with  those  spurious  books  which,  though  pseu- 
donymous, are  not  of  heretical  tendencies  and  were  considered 
by  more  indulgent  critics  as  only  disputed,  i.e.,  of  doubtful 
authenticity.^ 

About  a  century  later  Macarius  Magnes,  refuting  the 
objections  of  a  heathen  adversaiy,  refers  to  his  use  of  this 
book  as  a  standard  Christian  work.  Macarius  evidently  dis- 
believes its  genuineness,  but  accepts  its  teaching  as  orthodox. 

Sozomen  (about  a.D.  450)  testifies  to  its  public  use  once  a 
year  on  Good  Friday  by  the  churches  of  Palestine  in  his  day, 
though  he  admits  that  the  ancients  generally  considered  it 
spurious. 

Nicephorus  (about  A.D.  850),  in  drawing  up  a  classified  list 
of  insjDired  writings  for  practical  use,  places  this  book  among 
them,  though  in  an  inferior  position,  and  assigns  it  a  length 
of  three  hundred  lines,  or  a  little  shorter  than  the  Epistle  to 
the  Galatians. 

On  looking  back  upon  this  record,  we  find  that  the  Apo- 
calypse of  Peter  held  an  honourable  but  precarious  position 
among  deutero-canonical  writings,  being  in  all  probability  ac- 
cepted in  Eome  in  the  second  century,  and  certainly  in  Egypt, 
Lycia,   and  Palestine,   while  it  continued  to  be  transcribed 

1  H.  E.  iii.  3,  2. 

-  H.  E.  iii.  25,  4.  The  universally  accepted  books  are  ofidXoyovneua  : 
the  undoubtedly  spurious,  vodd :  those  of  an  intermediate  character  are 
dvirXeySfxeva  (disputed)  of  which  some  are  of  such  very  doubtful  authenti- 
city as  to  approximate  to  spuriousness :  and  in  this  last  category  Eusebius 
no  doubt  rightly  places  the  Apocalypse  of  Peter. 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  157 

as  late  as  the  ninth  century  in  Jerusalem,  and  no  doubt  also 
in  Egyi^t. 

It  is  further  probable  that  Hippolytus  of  Portus  (a.d.  220) 
made  use  of  it :  and  clear  traces  of  its  employment  are  found 
in  several  later  documents,  such  as  the  "  First  Book  of  Cle- 
ment, or  Testament  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ "  (a  work  pro- 
ceeding from  the  same  source  as  the  Clementine  Eecognitions)^ 
the  Second  Book  of  the  Sibylline  Oracles,  and  the  History  of 
Barlaam  and  Josaphat. 

The  language  of  the  newly -discovered  fragment  shows 
moreover  such  evident  connection  with  that  of  the  second 
Epistle  of  S.  Peter  that,  though  it  is  without  a  title,  there 
can  be  no  question  that  it  belongs  to  the  Petrine  cycle,  and 
may  be  confidently  accepted  as  ^Dart  of  the  long-lost  Apo- 
calypse. Its  date  cannot  be  certainly  determined :  but  the 
opinion  of  scholars  seems  to  be  in  favour  of  a  very  early 
origin,  going  back  to  quite  the  beginning  of  the  second, 
or  possibly  even  to  the  last  years  of  the  first  century.  It 
will  thus  be  among  the  most  ancient  relics  of  Christian 
literature,  and  this  antiquity  is  rendered  more  probable  by 
its  qualified  canonical  recognition  in  spite  of  the  peculiar 
nature  of  its  contents.  The  existing  portion  is  divisible 
into  three  parts,  a  prophetic  discourse  of  Christ  with  His 
Apostles,  a  description  of  Paradise,  and  an  Inferno  or  account 
of  the  punishment  of  the  wicked.  There  is  little  to  indicate 
any  particular  tendency  in  the  work.  It  is  built  on  the 
strong  instincts  of  the  religious  imagination,  and  has  evi- 
dently influenced  the  popular  belief  of  Christianity  in  no 
slight  degree.  Its  interest  is  so  great,  that  we  think  our 
readers  will  prefer  to  have  some  specimens  put  before  them 
rather  than  any  general  criticism  of  its  contents  :  ^ — 

The  Vision  of  Paradise. 

"  And  the  Lord  said  furthermore.  Let  us  go  unto  the  mountain 
and  pray.  And  as  we  the  twelve  disciples  went  with  Him,  we 
besought  Him  that   He  would   show  us   one   of  our  righteous 


158  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

brethren  that  had  departed  from  the  world  that  we  might  see  of 
what  form  they  were,  and  so  take  courage,  and  encourage  them 
also  that  should  hear  us. 

"  And  as  we  were  praying,  there  suddenly  appeared  two  men 
standing  before  the  Lord  towards  the  East,  whom  we  could  not 
look  upon  :  for  there  was  light,  such  as  never  eye  of  man  beheld 
nor  mouth  can  describe,  nor  heart  conceive  the  glory  wherewith 
they  were  clad  and  the  beauty  of  their  countenance. 

*'  And  when  we  saw  them  we  were  amazed :  for  their  bodies 
were  whiter  than  any  snow  and  redder  than  any  rose,  and  the 
red  thereof  was  mingled  with  the  white,  and,  in  a  word,  I  cannot 
describe  the  beauty  of  them  :  for  their  hair  was  thick  and  curling 
and  bright,  and  beautiful  upon  their  face  and  their  shoulders, 
like  a  wreath  woven  of  spikenard  and  bright  flowers,  or  like  a 
rainbow  in  the  sky,  such  was  their  beauty. 

"  When  therefore  we  saw  their  beauty,  we  were  all  amazement 
at  them,  for  they  had  appeared  suddenly  :  and  I  came  near  to 
the  Lord  and  said,  '  Who  are  these  ? '  He  saith  to  me,  '  These 
are  your  brethren  the  righteous,  whose  forms  ye  wished  to 
behold.'  And  I  saith  to  Him,  *  And  where  are  all  the  righteous, 
or  of  what  sort  is  the  world  wherein  they  are  and  possess  their 
glory?' 

"And  the  Lord  showed  me  a  very  great  place  outside  this 
world,  shining  excessively  with  light,  and  the  air  that  was  there 
illuminated  with  the  rays  of  the  sun,  and  the  earth  itself  bloom- 
ing with  unfading  flowers,  and  full  of  spices  and  fair-flowering 
plants,  incorruptible,  and  bearing  a  blessed  fruit :  and  so  strong 
was  the  perfume  that  it  was  borne  even  to  us  from  thence. 

"  And  the  dwellers  in  that  place  were  clad  in  the  raiment  of 
angels  of  light,  and  their  raiment  was  like  their  land  :  and  angels 
encircled  them  there.  And  the  glory  of  the  dwellers  there  was 
equal,  and  with  one  voice  they  praised  the  Lord  God  rejoicing  in 
that  place." 

From  the  Inferno. 

"  And  I  saw  also  another  place  over  against  that  other,  very 
squalid,  and  it  was  a  place  of  chastisement ;  and  those  that  were 
being  chastised  and  the  angels  that  were  chastising  had  their 
raiment  dark,  according  to  the  atmosphere  of  the  place. 

*' And  there  were  some  there  hanging  by  their  tongues;  and 
these  were  they  that  blaspheme  the  way  of  righteousness  :  and 
there  was  beneath  them  fire  flaming  and  tormenting  them. 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  159 

'•And  there  was  a  certain  great  lake  full  of  flaming  mire, 
wherein  were  certain  men  that  pervert  righteousness ;  and  tor- 
menting angels  were  set  upon  them. 

"  And  there  were  also  others,  women,  hung  by  their  hair  over 
that  mire  that  bubbled  up  :  and  these  were  they  that  had  adorned 
themselves  for  adultery  :  and  the  men  that  had  been  joined  with 
them  in  the  defilement  of  adultery  were  hanging  by  their  feet,  and 
had  their  heads  in  the  mire,  and  all  were  saying,  '  We  believed  not 
that  we  should  come  to  this  place.' " 

These  extracts  are  sufficient  to  show  the  character  of  the 
work.  Coming  as  it  did  with  the  supposed  authority  of  the 
chief  Apostle,  and  satisfying  as  it  did  some  of  the  deepest 
instincts  of  the  religious  heart,  we  cannot  wonder  that  its 
influence  was  great  and  permanent,  not  so  much  among 
theologians  as  in  the  popular  imagination,  where  its  ideas 
reigned  supreme  for  more  than  a  millennium,  culminating 
in  Dante's  poem ;  and  even  now,  amid  colder  spirits  and  a 
more  rational  faith,  they  still  retain  much  of  their  power  to 
terrify  or  to  console. 

In  connection  with  this  Apocalypse,  a  few  words  may  be 
added  with  regard  to  the  Sibylline  Oracles,  one  book  of 
which  shows  clear  traces  of  acquaintance  with  it.  The  col- 
lection, as  we  have  it,  consists  of  fourteen  books  of  very 
various  ages  and  of  mixed  authorship,  partly  Jewish,  partly 
Judaeo-Christian,  and  in  some  cases  an  originally  Jewish 
document  has  been  interpolated  by  Christian  hands.  The 
series  extends  from  the  period  of  the  Ptolemies  (circ.  B.C.  150) 
to  the  closing  half  of  the  third  century  A.D.,  or  even  later. 
The  subjects  of  all  are  similar,  prophetic  denunciations  of 
judgment  upon  the  various  nations,  mingled  with  apocalyptic 
visions  of  the  last  days.  The  language  is  that  of  the  Alex- 
andrian Epos,  a  pseudo-Homeric  dialect,  the  laws  of  rhythm 
and  scansion  being  often  imperfectly  understood.  The  first 
and  second  books,  the  sixth,  and  parts  of  the  third  and 
eighth,  and  possibly  the  prooemium,  are  generally  held  to  be 
of  Christian  origin.  Their  language  is  for  the  most  part 
too  vague  to  be  of  any  great  importance  for  historical  pur- 
poses.    But  they  are  of  interest  as  indicating  the  presence 


i6o  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

of  a  prophetical  impulse  in  the  Christian  Church,  and  a 
desire  to  blend  the  formal  excellence  of  Gentile  poetry  with 
the  spiritual  enthusiasm  of  Judaea.  Though  reflecting  the 
popular  as  distinct  from  the  patristic  element  in  Christian 
literature,  and  proceeding  from  Jud^eo-Christian  rather  than 
orthodox  circles,  these  oracles  gained  considerable  currency 
among  the  Apologists,  and  such  writers  as  Theophilus,  Justin 
and  Clement,  e\ddently  value  them  highly.  At  the  same 
time,  they  belong  more  strictly  to  the  history  of  Jewish  than 
of  Christian  literature. 

A  few  obscure  Gnostic  apocalypses  are  also  occasionally 
referred  to.  Epiphanius  speaks  of  an  Ascent  of  Paul^  (i.e., 
when  caught  up  in  ecstasy  into  heaven),  and  the  Decretnm 
Gelasii  mentions  apocaly[3ses  of  Thomas  and  Stephen.  The 
celebrated  "Apocalyj)se  of  Paul,"  together  with  other  similar 
productions,  belongs  to  the  post-Nicene  age. 


2.  Apocryphal  Gospels  (1st  Class). 

The  Apocryphal  Gospels  are  of  two  widely  distinct  kinds. 
They  may  be  considered  either  as  competitors  of  the  Canonical 
Gospels,  or  as  supplements  to  them.  The  former  are  the 
more  ancient.  They  are,  with  perhaps  one  exception,  of 
heretical  origin,  and  until  lately  were  known  only  by  a  few 
short  fragments.  The  others  have  to  a  considerable  extent 
survived,  being  considered  less  objectionable,  and  susceptible 
of  an  orthodox  redaction. 

Of  the  first  class,  we  shall  mention  first  a  work  that  stands 
by  itself,  and  is  referred,  not  without  hesitation,  to  the 
apocryphal  category.  This  is  the  "  Gospel  accor cling  to  the 
Hebrews,^'  identified  by  some,  but  without  good  reason,  with 
the  "Gospel  according  to  the  Twelve  Apostles,"  mentioned 
by  Origen  and  others.  It  is  referred  to  by  Clement  as  Scrip- 
ture.-    Origeu,  though  with  some  reserv^ation,  speaks  of  it 

V 
^  dva^ariKov  HavXov. 

2  Strom,  ii.  9,  where  the  word  yeypawTai.  {It  is  vjritten)  introduces  the 
quotation. 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  i6i 

as  authoritative.  1  Eusebius  reckons  it  among  the  disputed 
books,  though  he  allows  that  some  accept  it  as  canonical. 
There  is  no  doubt  that  it  was  written  in  Aramaic,  and  was 
very  generally  identified  or,  more  strictly,  confused  with  the 
lost  Hebrew  Gospel  of  S.  Matthew.  Jerome  speaks  of  it  as 
used  by  the  Nazarenes  and  Ebionites,  and  appears  to  endorse 
the  attribution  of  it  to  S.  Matthew,  though  his  opinion  is  not 
very  consistent.  That  Hegesippus,  the  Jewish  Christian, 
employed  it  we  learn  from  Eusebius.  According  to  Irenaeus, 
the  sect  of  the  Ebionites  used  only  S.  Matthew's  Gospel,  by 
which  is  probably  meant  the  Aramaic  Gospel  commonly  con- 
fused with  the  original  S.  Matthew — in  other  words,  the 
Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews. 

The  fragments  that  remain  sufficiently  attest  its  close  re- 
lation to  S.  Matthew,  though  there  are  also  some  remarkable 
affinities  w^ith  S.  Luke.  Jerome,  who  had  seen  and  read  it, 
attributes  to  it  very  high  authority,  though  he  does  not  go 
so  far  as  to  call  it  Scripture.  It  is  very  likely  that  the 
original  text  was  preserved  in  the  small  and  ail-but  orthodox 
community  of  the  Nazarenes,  and  that  the  Ebionites  who 
separated  from  them  tampered  with  it  considerably  to  suit 
their  views  of  the  Person  of  Christ.  Thus  their  Gospel,  as  we 
know,  suppressed  S.  Matthew's  account  of  the  miraculous 
birth,  while  the  Nazarene  Gospel  retained  it.  Then  again 
it  introduced  our  Lord  as  calling  the  Holy  Spirit  His  Mother, 
a  phrase  which  has  a  Gnostic  ring.^  Moreover,  at  the  institu- 
tion of  the  Lord's  Supper,  Christ  is  made  to  express  His 
unwillingness  to  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Passover  lamb,^  in 
language  which  is  a  distorted  reminiscence  of  S.  Luke.  In 
another  place  He  condemns  sacrifice.  On  the  occasion  of  His 
baptism  He  utters  these  remarkable  words,  "  Wherein  have  I 
sinned  that  I  should  be  baptized  by  John,  except  perhaps  this 

1  Jerome  affirms  that  Origen  often  used  it.  In  the  extant  passages 
Origen  implies  that  it  was  not  universally  accepted. 

2  This  was  probably  in  the  account  of  Christ's  temptation.  The  words 
are  "  Just  now  My  Mother  the  Holy  Spirit  took  Me  by  one  of  My  hairs 
and  bore  Me  up  to  the  great  mountain  Tabor." 

^  "  Have  I  desired  with  desire  to  eat  this  flesh  of  the  Passover  with 
you?"     Cf.  Luke  xxii.  15. 

L 


i62  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

very  thing  that  I  have  said  is  ignorance  ?  "  words  which  imply 
His  possible  peccability.  Many  other  divergences,  more  or 
less  slight,  from  the  Canonical  GosjDels  can  be  detected  in 
the  thirty-three  fragments  we  i30ssess.  One  of  its  most 
striking  features  was  the  inclusion  of  a  paragraph  concern- 
ing a  woman  accused  of  many  sins,  which  has  been  held  with 
great  probability  to  be  the  section  on  the  woman  taken  in 
adultery,  which  doubtless  belonged  to  the  synoptic  tradition, 
but  is  now  embedded  in  the  eighth  chapter  of  S.  John. 

The  problems  connected  with  this  lost  Gospel  are  of  the 
deepest  interest,  but  it  is  impossible  to  pursue  them  here. 
The  reader  is  referred  to  the  learned  and  thoughtful  work 
of  Mr.  Nicholson,^  which  gives  all  the  authorities  and  ably 
summarises  the  evidence.  His  estimate  may  be  inferred  from 
the  following  quotation  :  "  The  Fathers  of  the  Church,  while 
the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews  was  yet  extant  in  its 
entirety,  referred  to  it  always  with  respect,  often  with  rever- 
ence ;  some  of  them  unhesitatingly  accepted  it  as  being  what 
tradition  affirmed  it  to  be — the  work  of  Matthew — and  even 
those  who  have  not  put  on  record  their  ex^Dression  of  this 
opinion  have  not  questioned  it.  Is  such  an  attitude  (he  asks) 
consistent  with  the  supposition  that  this  Gospel  was  a  work 
of  heretical  tendencies  ?  " 

Our  own  answer  will  on  the  whole  agree  with  Mr.  Nichol- 
son's, As  retouched  by  the  Ebionites  it  doubtless  did  convey 
heretical  ideas,  but  in  its  original  form  this  can  hardly  have 
been  the  case.  The  evidence  seems  to  point  to  a  very  ancient 
origin  almost  within  the  apostolic  age,  and  to  a  nucleus  of 
authentic  narrative,  the  immense  value  of  which  was  un- 
happily discredited  by  Ebionite  insertions  and  omissions, 
these  being  rendered  possible  by  the  restriction  of  the  book 
within  the  limits  of  a  little  known  language  and  a  compara- 
tively narrow  section  of  Christendom.- 

^  "  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,"  by  E.  B.  Nicholson,  Bodley's 
Librarian,  Oxford. 

-  One  very  interesting  addition  to  the  canonical  narrative  was  its  account 
of  the  Risen  Lord's  appearing  to  James,  which  is  alluded  to  by  S.  Paul 
in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the  first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  James,  the 
Lord's  brother,  is  related  to  have  sworn  that  he  would  not  eat  bread  from 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.      163 

We  now  proceed  to  discuss  the  Apocryphal  Gospels,  pro- 
perly so  called.  The  first  is  the  "  Gospel  according  to  the 
Egyptictns,''  written  as  the  title  implies  in  Egypt,  some  time 
during  the  first  half  of  the  second  century,  by  an  author 
strongly  imbued  with  Gnostic  views.  It  claimed  to  be  con- 
sidered an  inspired  document,  and  as  such  was  received  by 
the  Encratites,^  and  perhaps  by  the  Naassenes  and  Sabellians. 
It  was  never  acknowledged  by  any  orthodox  church,  but  we 
find  it  quoted  as  a  reliable  source  of  Christ's  sayings  in 
Pseudo-Clement,  as  already  stated. ^  Lipsius  characterises  it 
as  a  product  of  that  pantheistic  gnosis  which  we  meet  with 
among  the  Naassenes  of  the  Philosophumena,^  according  to 
which  the  soul  is  of  pneumatic  nature,  and  comes  into  this 
lower  world  to  undergo  manifold  changes  till  finally  purified 
and  redeemed  by  Gnosis.  This  alone  can  teach  men  to 
apprehend  the  unity  underlying  the  apparent  contradictions  of 
sense,  such  as  male  and  female,  one  and  many,  body  and  soul. 
The  practical  result  of  this  theory  is  asceticism,  and  in  par- 
ticular, celibacy ;  and  this  Encratite  tendency  is  exemplified 
in  a  conversation  with  Salome  attributed  to  Christ.  She  asks, 
"  How  long  shall  death  reign  ?  "•  and  receives  the  answer, 
"So  long  as  ye  women  give  birth."  She  replies,  "Then 
have  I  well  done  that  I  bare  not,"  and  receives  the  further 
admonition,  "  Eat  of  every  herb,  but  the  bitter  one  eat  not." 
By  this  expression  the  intercourse  of  the  sexes  is  intended. 

Another  apocryphal  Gospel  was  that  ''according  to  Peter,'' 
of  which,  until  last  year,  we  knew  scarcely  anything  except 
that  it  afiirmed  our  Lord's  brethren  to  be  sons  of  Joseph  by 
a  former  wife,  and  that  Serapion,  Bishop  of  Antioch  before 
A.D.  200,  found  it  in  ecclesiastical  use  at  Rhossus  in  Cilicia, 

that  hour  wherein  he  had  drunk  the  cup  of  the  Lord  until  he  saw  Him 
risen  from  the  dead.  On  the  day  of  the  resurrection,  James  having  kept 
his  vow,  the  Lord  appeared  to  him  and  said  to  them  that  were  by,  "  Set 
a  table  and  bread  ; "  then,  taking  the  bread,  He  blessed  and  gave  to  James 
the  Just,  saying,  "  Rise,  My  brother,  eat  thy  bread,  for  the  Son  of  Man  is 
risen  from  the  dead." 

1  Clem.  Al.  Str.  iii.  ch.  9. 

-  See  page  42,  where  quotations  are  given. 

•'  As  described  by  Hippolytus  (A.i).  225). 


i64  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

and  was  so  much  displeased  with  its  Docetic  tendency  that 
he  suppressed  it.  There  was  a  theory,  founded  on  a  ques- 
tionable reading-,  that  Justin  had  used  it/  and  Eusebius 
mentions  that  Clement,  whose  judgment  was  not  equal  to 
his  learning,  had  quoted  it,  though  in  another  place  he 
expressly  states  that  no  early  Church  teacher  had  regarded 
it  as  genuine.  The  great  discovery  already  referred  to  ^  has 
enabled  us  to  judge  of  this  celebrated  Gospel  for  ourselves. 
An  important  fragment,  containing  the  account  of  the  Cruci- 
fixion and  Resurrection,  has  come  to  light,  and  fully  confirms 
the  judgment  of  Serapion.  As  its  first  English  commentator 
observes,  it  is  a  good  instance  of  what  the  Germans  call  a 
"  tendency-writing,"  i.e.,  a  history  told  with  a  purpose,  and 
modified  to  suit  that  purpose.  The  purpose  in  this  case  is 
to  deny  the  actual  sufferings  of  our  Lord,  and  to  convey  the 
doctrine  of  a  heavenly  Christ,  who  came  upon  the  earthly 
Christ  at  His  baptism,  and  left  Him  at  the  moment  of  His 
death.  This  theory  belongs  to  the  earl}''  Docetism,  combated 
by  Ignatius,  of  which  Cerinthus  is  the  first  example,  and 
must  not  be  confounded  with  the  later  Docetism,  which  gave 
to  our  Saviour  only  an  apparent  body,  and  arose  from  the 
Gnostic  unwillingness  to  allow  the  Divine  any  contact  with 
gross  matter. 

For  purposes  of  theological  controversy  the  fragment  is 
highly  important.  It  reveals  an  acquaintance  with  all  our 
four  Gosjoels,  ap|)arently  without  any  misgivings  as  to  their 
equal  authority  ;  it  gives  no  countenance  to  the  once  popular 
theory  of  an  Ur-evanr/elium,  or  original  Gospel  on  which  the 
synoptics  were  founded,  nor  does  it  show  any  sign  of  acquaint- 
ance with  any  other  Gos]3el  besides  the  canonical  four.  The 
further  its  date  is  thrown  back,  the  more  telling  does  this 
testimony  become.  Some  points  of  coincidence  with  the 
Leucian  Acts  and  with  Justin's  works,  as  well  as  its  use  by 
Clement,  all  point  to  an  early  origin,  probably  well  within 
the  first  half  of  the  second  century.     It  belonged  to  the  cycle 

1  Dial.  §  lo6.  The  reading  d7rofJLVT]fiopeu/j.aTa  avrou  (sc.  Uerpov)  should 
almost  certainly  be  changed  to  avrCiv  (sc.  tCjv  a-rroaToKuv).  Justin  never 
refers  to  any  such  isolated  apostolic  testimony,  2  ggg  p_  j^^^ 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  165 

of  anti-Jewish  documents,  of  which  we  have  other  examples 
in  the  Wanderings  or  Circuits  of  the  Apostles,  and  the  later 
Faradosis  Pilati.  In  its  hostility  to  the  Jews  it  may  also  be 
compared  with  the  Apology  of  Aristides,  and  of  the  writer  to 
Diognetns. 

We  think  our  readers  will  be  glad  to  have  the  whole  of 
this  interesting  fragment  before  them.  We  avail  ourselves 
of  Mr.  Robinson's  kind  permission  to  use  his  translation  (first 
edition) : — 

"  But  of  the  Jews  none  washed  his  hands,  neither  Herod  nor 
any  one  of  His  judges.  And  when  they  wished  to  wash  them, 
Pilate  rose  up.  And  then  Herod  the  king  commandeth  that  the 
Lord  be  taken,  saying  to  them,  What  things  soever  I  commanded 
you  to  do  unto  Him,  do.  And  there  was  come  there  Joseph,  the 
friend  of  Pilate  and  of  the  Lord  ;  and  know^ing  that  they  were 
about  to  crucify  Him,  he  came  to  Pilate  and  asked  the  body  of 
the  Lord  for  burial.  And  Pilate  sent  to  Herod  and  asked  His 
body.  And  Herod  said,  Brother  Pilate,  even  if  no  one  had  asked 
Him,  we  should  have  buried  Him  ;  since  indeed  the  sabbath 
draweth  on ;  for  it  is  written  in  the  law  that  the  sun  go  not 
down  on  him  that  is  put  to  death,  on  the  day  before  the  un- 
leavened bread.  1 

"And  they  took  the  Lord  and  pushed  Him  as  they  ran,  and 
said.  Let  us  drag  away  the  Son  of  God,  having  obtained  power 
over  Him.  And  they  clothed  Him  with  purple,  and  set  Him 
on  the  seat  of  judgment,  saying,  Judge  righteously,  O  King  of 
Israel. 2 

"  And  one  of  them  brought  a  crown  of  thorns  and  put  it  on 
the  head  of  the  Lord.  And  others  stood  and  spat  in  His  eyes, 
and  others  smote  His  cheeks  :  others  pricked  Him  with  a  reed ; 
and  some  scourged  Him,  saying,  With  this  honour  let  us  honour 
the  Son  of  God. 

"  And  they  brought  two  malefactors,  and  they  crucified  the 
Lord  between  them.     But  He  held  His  peace,  as  having  no  pain. 

^  We  see  here  the  author's  correct  estimate  of  Jewish  scrupulosity. 
The  regularity  rather  than  the  justice  of  the  sentence  is  the  object  of 
their  concern,  while  the  idea  of  a  criminal  surviving  till  after  sundown 
would  disturb  their  consciences  greatly. 

-  Here,  as  in  other  points,  there  is  a  coincidence  with  Justin's  account 
which  makes  it  quite  possible  that  Justin  had  read  this  book. 


i66  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

And  when  they  had  raised  the  cross  they  wrote  upon  it,  This  is 
the  King  of  Israel.  And  having  set  His  garments  before  Him 
they  parted  them  among  them  and  cast  a  lot  for  them. 

"  And  one  of  those  malefactors  reproached  them  saying,  We 
have  suffered  thus  for  the  evils  that  we  have  done,  but  this  man, 
having  become  the  Saviour  of  men,  what  wrong  hath  He  done  to 
you  ?  And  they,  being  angry  with  him,  commanded  that  his 
legs  sliould  not  be  broken,  that  he  might  die  in  torment. 

"  And  it  was  noon,  and  darkness  covered  all  Judsea  :  and  they 
were  troubled  and  distressed,  lest  the  sun  had  gone  down,  since 
He  yet  lived  :  for  it  was  written  for  them,  that  the  sun  go  not 
down  on  Him  that  is  jout  to  death.  And  one  of  them  said,  Give 
Him  to  drink  gall  with  vinegar.  And  they  mixed  and  gave  Him 
to  drink,  and  fulfilled  all  things,  and  accomplished  their  sins 
against  their  own  head. 

"And  many  went  about  with  lamps,  supposing  that  it  was 
night,  and  fell  down.  And  the  Lord  cried  out,  saying,  My  power. 
My  power,  hast  thou  forsaken  Me  ?  And  when  He  had  said  it,  He 
was  taken  up.^  And  in  that  hour  the  vail  of  the  temple  of 
Jerusalem  was  rent  in  twain. 

"And  then  they  drew  out  the  nails  from  the  hands  of  the 
Lord,  and  laid  Him  upon  the  earth,  and  the  earth  all  quaked, 
and  great  fear  arose.  Then  the  sun  shone,  and  it  was  found  the 
ninth  hour  :  and  the  Jews  rejoiced,  and  gave  His  body  to  Joseph 
that  he  might  bury  it,  since  he  had  seen  what  good  things  He 
had  done.  And  he  took  the  Lord  and  washed  Him,  and  rolled 
Him  in  a  linen  cloth,  and  brought  Him  into  his  own  tomb,  which 
was  called  the  Garden  of  Joseph.  Then  the  Jews  and  the  elders 
and  the  priests,  seeing  what  evil  they  had  done  to  themselves, 
began  to  lament  and  to  say,  Woe  for  our  sins  :  for  the  judgment 
and  the  end  of  Jerusalem  hath  drawn  nigh.  And  I  with  my 
companions  was  grieved  ;  and  being  wounded  in  mind  we  hid  our- 
selves :  for  we  were  being  sought  for  by  them  as  malefactors,  and 
as  wishing  to  set  fire  to  the  temple.  And  upon  all  these  things 
we  fasted  and  sat  mourning  and  weeping  night  and  day  until  the 
sabbath. 

"  But  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  and  elders  being  gathered 
together  one  w  ith  another,  when  they  heard  that  all  the  people 

^  This  is  the  form  of  Docetism  condemned  by  Irenseus.  The  Hebrew 
word,  we  are  told,  was  translated  thus  by  other  authorities.  It  makes 
for  the  reading  'HXi  as  against  'EXwt. 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  167 

murmured  and  beat  their  breasts,  saying,  '  If  by  His  death  these 
most  mighty  things  have  come  to  pass,  see  how  just  He  is ; '  the 
elders  were  afraid  and  came  to  Pilate,  beseeching  him  and  saying, 
Give  us  soldiers,  that  they  may  watch  His  sepulchre  for  three 
days,  lest  His  disciples  come  and  steal  Him  away,  and  the  people 
suppose  that  He  is  risen  from  the  dead  and  do  us  evil.  And  Pilate 
gave  them  Petronius  the  centurion  with  soldiers  to  watch  the 
tomb.  And  the  elders  and  Scribes  came  with  them  to  the 
sepulchre,  and  having  rolled  a  great  stone  together  with  the  cen- 
turion and  the  soldiers,  they  all  together  who  were  there  set  it  at 
the  door  of  the  sepulchre  :  and  they  put  upon  it  seven  seals,  and 
they  pitched  a  tent  there,  and  kept  watch. 

"  And  early  in  the  morning  as  the  sabbath  was  drawing  on, 
there  came  a  multitude  from  Jerusalem  and  the  res^ion  round 
about,  that  they  might  see  the  sepulchre  that  was  sealed.  And 
in  the  night  in  which  the  Lord's  day  was  drawing  on,  as  the 
soldiers  kept  watch  two  by  two  on  guard,  there  was  a  great  voice 
in  the  heaven ;  and  they  saw  the  heavens  opened,  and  two  men 
descending  thence  with  great  light  and  approaching  the  tomb. 
And  that  stone  which  was  put  at  the  door  rolled  away  of  itself 
and  departed  to  one  side ;  and  the  tomb  was  opened  and  both  the 
young  men  entered  in.  When,  therefore,  the  soldiers  saw  it, 
they  awakened  the  centurion  and  the  elders,  for  they,  too,  w^ere 
hard  by  keeping  watch ;  and,  as  they  declared  what  things  they 
had  seen,  again  they  see  coming  forth  from  the  tomb  three  men, 
and  the  two  supporting  the  one,  and  a  cross  following  them. 
And  of  the  two  the  head  reached  unto  heaven,  but  the  head  of 
Him  that  was  led  by  them  overpassed  the  heavens.  And  they 
heard  a  voice  from  the  heavens  saying,  '  Hast  thou  preached  to 
them  that  sleep  ? '    And  an  answer  was  heard  from  the  cross,  Yea. 

"They  therefore  considered  with  one  another  whether  to  go 
away  and  show  these  things  unto  Pilate.  And  while  they  yet 
thought  thereon,  the  heavens  again  appear  opened  and  a  certain 
man  descending  and  entering  into  the  sepulchre.  When  the 
centurion  and  they  that  were  with  him  saw  these  things,  they 
hastened  by  night  to  Pilate,  leaving  the  tomb  which  they  were 
watching,  and  declared  all  things  which  they  had  seen,  being 
distressed,  and  saying.  Truly  He  was  the  Son  of  God.  Pilate 
answered  and  said,  I  am  pure  from  the  blood  of  the  Son  of  God  ; 
but  ye  determined  this, 

"  Then  they  all  drew  near  and  besought  him  and  entreated  him 


i68  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

to  command  the  centurion  and  the  soldiers  to  say  nothing  of  the 
things  which  they  had  seen  :  For  it  is  better,  say  they,  for  us  to 
owe  the  greatest  debt  of  sin  before  God,  and  not  to  fall  into  the 
hand  of  the  people  of  the  Jews  and  be  stoned.  Pilate  therefore 
commanded  the  centurion  and  the  soldiers  to  say  nothing. 

"And  at  dawn  upon  the  Lord's  day  Mary  Magdalen,  a  disciple 
of  the  Lord,  who,  fearing  because  of  the  Jews,  since  they  were 
burning  wdth  wrath,  had  not  done  at  the  Lord's  sepulchre  the 
things  which  the  women  are  wont  to  do  for  those  that  die  and 
that  are  beloved  by  them,  took  her  friends  with  her  and  came  to 
the  sepulchre  where  He  was  laid.  And  they  feared  lest  the  Jews 
should  see  them,  and  they  said,  Even  if  on  that  day  on  which  He 
was  crucified  we  could  not  weep  and  lament,  yet  now  let  us  do 
these  things  at  His  sepulchre.  But  who  shall  roll  away  for  us  the 
stone  that  is  laid  at  the  door  of  the  sepulchre,  that  we  may  enter 
in  and  sit  by  Him,  and  do  the  things  that  are  due  ?  For  the  stone 
was  great,  and  we  fear  lest  some  one  see  us.  And  even  if  we  cannot, 
yet  let  us  set  at  the  door  the  things  which  we  bring  for  a  memorial 
of  Him ;  let  us  weep  and  lament,  until  we  come  to  our  home. 

"  And  they  went  away  and  found  the  tomb  opened,  and  coming 
near  they  looked  in  there ;  and  they  see  a  certain  young  man 
sitting  in  the  midst  of  the  tomb,  beautiful  and  clothed  in  a  very 
bright  robe,  who  said  to  them,  Why  are  ye  come  ?  Whom  seek 
ye  1  Is  it  that  crucified  One  ?  He  is  risen  and  gone  away.  But 
if  ye  believe  not,  look  in  and  see  the  place  where  He  lay,  that  He 
is  not  here ;  for  He  is  risen  and  gone  away  thither,  whence  He 
was  sent.     Then  the  women  feared  and  fled. 

"Nowit  was  the  last  day  of  the  unleavened  bread,  and  many  went 
forth  from  returning  to  their  homes,  as  the  feast  was  ended.  But 
we,  the  twelve  disci^^les  of  the  Lord,  mourned  and  were  grieved  ; 
and  each  one  grieving  for  that  which  was  come  to  pass  departed 
to  his  home.  But  I,  Simon  Peter,  and  Andrew  my  brother,  took 
our  nets  and  went  away  to  the  sea  :  and  there  was  with  us  Levi 
the  son  of  Alphseus,  whom  the  Lord  .  .   .   ."  (The  rest  is  lost.) 

The  questions  suggested  by  this  fragment  are  so  numerous 
and  important  that  we  may  be  sure  they  will  excite  keen 
attention,  not  only  among  scholars,  but  among  the  religious 
public.  The  most  reassuring  result  of  its  discovery  is  the 
confirmation  it  gives  to  the  original  authority  of  the  four 
Gospels.     And  if,  as  seems  likely,  its  date  be  thrown  back  to 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  169 

the  commencement  of  the  second  century,  it  will  prove  one 
of  the  most  effective  champions  of  that  church  tradition 
which  has  been  so  fiercely  attacked,  but  has  shown  itself  so 
impregnable. 

The  Diatessaron,  or  Composite  Gospel  of  Tatian,  is  also 
classed  among  the  apocryphal  writings.  A  somewhat  full 
account  of  it  will  be  found  in  the  chapter  on  Tatian.  It  is 
not  truly  parallel  to  those  we  have  been  considering,  being 
a  distorted  picture  of  the  Canonical  Gospels  rather  than  an 
independent  work. 

To  the  same  class  belongs  the  celebrated  Gospel  of  Marcion, 
the  greater  portion  of  which  can  be  recovered  from  the  fourth 
book  of  Tertullian  Against  Marcion,  and  from  the  forty- 
second  chapter  of  Epiphanius'  work  on  Heresies.  It  was  a 
Gnosticising  recast  of  S.  Luke,  and  omitted  everything  which 
would  not  agree  with  Marcion's  it  priori  theory  of  Gospel 
truth.  It  had  no  critical  value,  but  was  only  useful  as 
embodying  what  he  acknowledged  as  the  source  of  his  teach- 
ing.    Its  date  may  be  given  as  about  a.d.  145. 

This  passion  for  revising  and  rewriting  the  Gospels  in 
accordance  with  their  own  views  was  widely  sjDread  among 
the  Gnostics.  Origen  speaks  of  a  Gospel  of  Basilides,  which 
may  have  been  founded  on  one  or  more  of  the  Canonical 
Gospels,  with  additions  drawn  from  the  supposed  "Traditions 
of  Matthias,"  on  which  he  greatly  relied.  Indeed,  a  Gospel 
of  Matthias  is  mentioned  in  another  ^^lace  by  Origen,  which 
consisted  of  secret  discourses  received  by  Matthias  from  our 
Lord.  If  this  be  the  same  as  the  Gospel  of  Basilides,  we 
may  infer,  from  the  short  fragments  given  by  Clement,  that 
its  tendency  was  severely  ascetic,  and  therefore  favourable 
to  the  Gnostic  views  taught  by  Basilides. 

One  main  difference  between  the  Gnostics  and  the  Orthodox 
was  the  invariable  preference  of  the  former  for  the  revela- 
tions of  some  particular  Apostle,  whereas  the  Church  always 
held  fast  to  the  consentient  tradition  of  the  whole*college. 
All  the  Apologists  emphasise  the  unity  of  apostolic  teaching, 
and  no  suspicion  of  any  particular  revelation  is  ever  dis- 
cernible.    On  the  contrary,  the  Gnostic  Gospels  usually  bear 


lyo  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

some  one  name.  For  instance,  we  hear  of  a  Gospel  of  Andrew, 
a  Gospel  of  Barnabas,  a  Gospel  of  Bartholomew,  a  Gospel  of 
Philip,  a  Gospel  of  Thaddeus  ;  and  last,  but  not  least,  a  Gospel 
of  Judas  Iscariot,  in  use  among  the  Cainite  sect,  who  made 
it  their  boast  to  reverence  all  those  characters  whom  the 
Church  and  the  Scriptures  condemn.  Besides  these  works, 
there  were  others  of  a  more  general  character,  embodying 
doctrinal  dissertations  in  the  garb  of  narratives,  as  the  Gospel 
of  the  Four  Corners ;  the  Gospel  of  Truth,  used  by  the  followers 
of  Valentinus;  the  Gospel  of  Peifection,  and  the  Gospel  of 
Ere,  both  probably  composed  under  the  influence  of  Ophite 
Gnostics,  and  of  doubtful  moral  tendencies. 


Gospels  of  the  Second  Class. 

The  next  class  of  Gospels  to  be  considered  contains  those 
which  aim  at  supplementing  the  canonical  ones  by  filling  up 
the  gaps  in  their  record.  They  are  concerned  chiefly  with 
the  events  preceding  our  Saviour's  birth,  the  parental  ante- 
cedents of  Mary,  the  infancy  of  Jesus,  His  trial  before  Pilate, 
His  descent  into  the  under-world.  Whatever  their  original 
source,  they  soon  became  j)opular  with  the  mass  of  Latin 
Christians,  and  in  their  turn  reacted  upon  dogmatic  theolog}^ 
which  has  incorporated  several  of  their  ideas.  Thus  the 
perpetual  Virginity  and  Assumption  of  the  Blessed  Virgin 
Mary,  possibly  also  the  Immaculate  Conception,  are  due  to 
this  source.  Only  a  few  of  these  writings  belong  to  the  period 
surveyed  in  our  book  ;  but  the  instinct  which  gave  them 
birth  undoubtedly  had  full  play  in  the  second  century,  and 
though  the  existing  documents  may  be  two  or  three  hundred 
years  later,  yet  the  nucleus  of  the  legend  is  in  most  cases  early. 

The  first  in  order  of  time  and  interest  is  the  Gospel  of 
James,  commonly  known  as  the  Protexangelium.  This  work 
was  thought  by  Tischendorf  to  have  existed  in  its  present 
form  as  early  as  Justin.  But  when  scrutinised,  its  patch- 
work character  betrays  an  editor's  hand.  Moreover,  the 
citations  in  the  Fathers  appear  to  come  from  a  different  and 
earlier  recension.     This  is  the  case  with  some  of  those  in 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  171 

Justin. 1  Probably  there  were  several  recastings  before  it 
assumed  its  present  shape.  The  archetype  which  Justin 
and  Origen  probably  used,  was  no  doubt  a  Judseo- Christian 
writing,  which  was  subsequently  amplified  by  a  Gnostic 
hand.  It  was  attributed  (on  no  historical  grounds)  to  James 
the  Lord's  brother.  The  Gnostic  redaction  may  be  rightly 
ascribed  by  S.  Jerome  (in  his  letter  prefixed  to  the  Pseudo- 
Matthew)  to  Leucius  Charinus.  Dating  this  writer  about 
A.D.  250,  we  shall  bring  our  existing  Protevangel  down  to 
A.D,  280  or  even  later. 

Its  author,  besides  S.  Matthew  and  S.  Luke,  used  portions 
of  the  Old  Testament  and  Apocrypha,  as  well  as  Jewish  and 
Christian  legends.  We  find  in  it  for  the  first  time  the  names 
of  Joachim  and  Anna  as  parents  of  the  Virgin,  but  it  is  un- 
certain whether  traditional  or  invented.  The  book  abounds 
in  mistakes  and  inconsistencies,  as  well  as  marvellous  lesrends,^ 
but  says  little  about  those  of  the  infancy.  It  is  extant  in 
several  Greek  MSS.,  also  in  Arabic  and  Coptic.  The  name 
Protevangelium  was  given  to  it  by  Postel,  who  brought  it  to 
Europe,  and  soon  after  (1552)  it  was  printed  in  Latin  and  Greek. 

Summary  of  the  Protevangelium. 

Joachim,  a  wealthy  Israelite,  came  to  present  his  gifts  before 
the  Lord  :  but  the  High  Priest  would  not  receive  them,  because 
Joachim  had  raised  up  no  seed  in  Israel  :  therefore  he  withdrew 
to  the  wilderness  and  fasted  forty  days  and  forty  nights,  praying 
for  seed.  His  wife  Anna  also  prayed  to  the  Lord  :  and  the  Lord 
sent  His  angel  to  comfort  her  with  promise  of  a  child.  And  at 
the  appointed  time  she  bore  a  beautiful  girl  and  called  her  name 
Mary,  and  vowed  that  the  child  should  be  given  to  the  Lord.  So 
when  Mary  was  three  years  old,  her  parents  brought  her  to  the 
Temple,  and  left  her  there.  And  Mary  was  like  a  dove  brought 
up  in  the  Temple  of  the  Lord,  and  received  food  from  the  hand 
of  an  angel.     And  when  she  was  twelve  years  old,  it  was  revealed 

^  Justin  mentions  Christ's  birth  in  a  cave  ;  so  does  this  Gospel,  but  with 
significant  differences,  which  throws  doubt  on  their  connection.  Again, 
Justin  brings  tlie  wise  men  from  Arabia,  the  Protevangelium  does  not.— 
Trypho,  78. 

-  Particularly  the  opening  of  the  rock  to  hide  Elizabeth  and  her  son  from 
Herod's  wrath. 


172  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

to  the  high  priest  that  he  should  summon  the  widowers  of  the 
people  and  assign  her  to  him  whom  the  Lord  should  choose  for 
her  guardian.  Joseph  was  the  widower  selected  :  but  he  wished  to 
decline  the  charge.  In  this,  however,  he  was  overruled,  and  Mary 
was  taken  to  his  house,  but  not  as  his  wife.  One  day,  when  she 
was  sixteen  years  old,  as  she  was  drawing  water,  the  Angelic 
Salutation  came  to  her.  She  accepted  it,  and  went  to  tell  her 
cousin  Elizabeth,  who  was  also  with  child.  On  her  return  Joseph 
was  greatly  troubled,  and  kept  away  from  his  place  at  the  coun- 
cil. But  the  thing  became  known,  and  Annas  the  Scribe  induced 
the  priest  to  try  Joseph  and  Mary  by  the  ordeal  of  the  Water  of 
Jealousy.  They  passed  it  without  reproof,  and  shortly  afterwards 
Mary  brought  forth  her  Son  in  a  cave  at  Bethlehem.  The  whole 
creation  is  represented  as  spell- bound  at  the  heavenly  birth- 
throes.i  Salome,  who  was  passing  by,  ventured  to  doubt  the 
miracle,  but  immediately  her  hand  was  withered.  Then  follows 
the  episode  of  Herod  and  the  Magi.  Jesus  having  been  conveyed 
into  Egypt,  the  king's  rage  vents  itself  u^Don  Zacharias  the  father 
of  John  the  Baptist,  whom  he  murders  at  the  altar,  having  in 
vain  attempted  to  seize  the  child  and  his  mother,  who  are  won- 
drously  preserved  by  God. 

An  inferior  dressing-np  of  this  interesting  story  is  preserved 
under  the  title  of  the  Pseudo-Mattheiu,  or  the  Gospel  of  the  In- 
fancy of  Mary,  belonging  probably  to  the  fifth  century.  The 
work  is  compiled  from  at  least  three  sources — chapters  i-i/ 
from  the  Protevangelium,  chapters  1 8-2  5  from  some  unknown 
document,  and  chapters  26-42  chiefly  from  the  Pseudo- 
Thomas.  The  middle  portion  especially  is  full  of  marvels, 
but  as  the  whole  document  is  late,  we    need   not   stop  to 

^  The  passage  (ch.  18)  is  very  curious,  and  points  to  a  Gnostic  source. 
"  And  I  Joseph  walked  and  I  walked  not :  and  I  looked  up  into  the  air, 
and  saw  the  air  violently  agitated,  and  I  looked  up  at  the  pole  of 
heaven,  and  I  saw  it  stationary  and  the  fowls  of  heaven  still ;  and 
I  looked  at  the  earth,  and  saw  a  vessel  lie,  and  workmen  reclining  by  it, 
and  their  hands  in  the  vessel,  and  those  who  handled  it  did  not  handle  it, 
and  those  who  took  did  not  lift,  and  those  who  presented  it  to  their  mouth 
did  not  present  it,  but  the  faces  of  all  were  looking  upward :  and  I  saw 
the  sheep  scattered,  and  the  sheep  stood,  and  the  shepherd  lifted  up  his 
hand  to  strike  them,  and  his  hand  remained  up  ;  and  I  looked  at  the  stream 
of  the  river,  and  I  saw  that  the  mouths  of  the  kids  were  down,  and  not 
drinking ;  and  everything  which  was  being  impelled  forward  was  inter- 
cepted in  its  course." 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  173 

consider  it.  The  Gos-pd  of  the  Nativity  of  Mary  is  a  less 
pretentious  composition,  and  though  in  its  present  form  be- 
longing to  the  fifth  or  sixth  century,  it  is  no  doubt  based  on 
early  popular  legends. 

The  only  other  apocryphal  Gospel  that  can  lay  claim  to  an 
early  date  is  that  of  Thomas,  or  the  Gospel  of  the  Infancy} 
We  J30ssess  this  remarkable  work  in  three  forms,  but  none  of 
them  is  the  original ;  this  mounts  back  to  the  middle  of  the 
second  century,  or  even  earlier.  It  covers  a  definite  period 
in  our  Saviour's  life,  from  his  fifth  to  his  twelfth  year,  and 
represents  Him  as  a  captious  and  wayward  Being,  fully 
conscious  of  His  supernatural  powers,  and  using  them  some- 
times in  mercy,  but  oftener  in  wrath,  proving  an  intolerable 
scourge  to  His  neighbourhood.  One  mark  of  His  divine 
knowledge  is  His  insight  into  the  hidden  projDerties  of  the 
letters  of  the  alphabet,  in  which  He  puts  His  teachers  to 
shame,  and  apparently  gives  inspired  sanction  to  the  wild 
dreams  of  Marcus  and  his  school.^ 

This  Gospel  was  in  use  among  the  Naassenes  and  Mar- 
cosians,  and  is  cited  bv  several  Fathers  from  Orio-en  down- 
wards.  Its  character  was  Docetic,  and  its  hypothesis  of  the 
consciousness  of  Deity  on  the  part  of  the  infant  Christ  is 
against  the  Church  tradition.  In  spite,  however,  of  its 
objectionable  features,  it  responded  so  acceptably  to  the 
popular  craving  for  the  marvellous  that  it  was  thought 
worth  dressing  up  by  a  succession  of  orthodox  redactors. 
The  same  remark  applies  to  another  document  of  uncertain 
age,  The  Passing  of  Mary,^  attributed  to  the  Apostle  John, 
but  most  probably  the  work  of  Leucius  Charinus  of  Antioch, 
an  inventive  heretic,  to  whose  unscrupulous  pen  a  multitude 
of  falsifications  are  ascribed. 

Decidedly  the  most  orthodox  of  all  these  forgeries  are  the 
Gospels  of  the  Passion,  of  Nicodeiniis^  or  The  Acts  of  Pilate^ 
Eeaders  of  Justin  will  remember  that  that  Father  appeals 

^  TO.  TraiSLKCL  Tov  Kvplov. 

"  See  the  reference  to  Marcus  in  the  chapter  on  Irenajus. 
^  KoL/j.r]aLs  ttjs  Mapias.     Transitus  Mariae. 

^  I  call  it  "Gospels"  rather  than  "Gospel,"  because  I  think  the  two 
parts  are  by  different  hands.    See  Cowper's  Apocryphal  Gospels,  p.  Ixxxv. 


174  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

with  confidence  to  Pilate's  Acts  as  laid  up  in  tlie  Imperial 
Archives,  and  accessible  to  all  who  wish  to  test  the  truth  of 
the  Gospel  history.^  From  another  passage  in  his  Apology 
it  was  inferred  that  Pilate  may  have  been  convinced  of  the 
Divinity  of  Christ.  Hence  the  idea  sjDread  that  Pilate  bore 
public  testimony  to  this  as  well  as  to  His  innocence,  which 
last  fact  we  learn  from  S.  Matthew.  As  regards  the  present 
form  of  the  work,  together  with  all  the  Pilate  and  Herod 
literature  connected  with  it,  the  majority  of  critics  believe 
them  all  to  be  later  than  Eusebius,  Tischendorf  being  almost 
alone  in  suggesting  a  pre-Nicene  date.-  Several  of  the 
stories  told  in  the  second  j^art  of  Nicodemus  are  certainly 
drawn  from  early  sources,  among  which  may  be  the  Apoca- 
lypse of  Moses. 

Before  quitting  this  part  of  the  subject,  we  may  briefly 
notice  the  correspondence  between  King  Abgar  of  Edessa 
and  Jesus  Christ,  which  has  acquired  a  fictitious  celebrity 
from  being  included  in  the  history  of  Eusebius.  How  so 
cautious  a  writer  could  have  imagined  these  letters  genuine, 
or  even  worthy  of  serious  consideration,  is  hard  to  under- 
stand. They  were  probably  first  issued  in  Syriac  by  some 
Christian  of  Edessa  in  the  third  century,  and  this  Syriac 
origin  may  have  imposed  upon  the  historian. 


3.  Apocryphal  Acts. 

We  now  leave  the  Gospels  and  pass  to  a  brief  review  of 
the  Apocryphal  Apostolic  Acts.  It  may  be  noted  that  the 
strong  repugnance  felt  by  the  Catholic  Church  to  any  tam- 
pering with  the  biography  of  Christ  did  not  extend  equally 
to  those  of  the  Apostles.     It  is  indeed  a   surprising  thing 

^  There  is  nothing  improbable,  quite  the  contrary,  in  the  idea  that 
Pilate  sent  in  a  formal  statement  of  the  condemnation  of  Christ.  But  it 
was  probably  contained  in  a  few  lines,  and  it  is  doubtful  whether  any  of 
the  Fathers  who  speak  of  it  had  seen  it. 

-  Justin  and  TertuUian,  in  speaking  of  the  Acts  of  Pilate,  refer  to  an 
official  document,  not  to  a  history.  The  fact  is  that  the  title  Acts  of  Pilate 
is  a  misnomer,  and  calculated  to  mislead.  There  need  be  no  connection 
whatever  between  the  two  documents. 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  175 

that  so  little  authentic  information  about  the  Apostles  exists. 
In  the  dearth  of  knowledge  a  rich  crop  of  legend  sprang  up, 
chiefly  circulated  by  the  Gnostics,  but  soon  appropriated  and 
highly  esteemed  by  the  Church. ^ 

The  earliest  nucleus  of  the  legend  is  found  in  the  separa- 
tion of  the  apostolic  band  from  Jerusalem.  It  was  tradi- 
tionally reported  that  the  Twelve  arranged  for  their  respective 
missionary  provinces,  after  the  manner  of  the  Roman  pro- 
consuls, by  casting  lots.  This  story  afterwards  crystallised 
into  a  work  called  the  Sortes  Apostolorum.  Out  of  it  grew, 
as  early  as  the  second  century,  the  Apostolic  Ordinances,^  of 
which  there  are  traces  of  three  separate  collections  in  the  exist- 
ing Apostolical  Constitutions.  The  idea  that  underlies  these 
works  is  that  the  Apostles,  before  parting,  agreed  to  deliver 
certain  ordinances  under  separate  names  but  with  joint 
responsibility,  and  these  of  course  were  to  be  binding  on  the 
whole  of  Christendom.  8uch  were  the  Judgment  of  Peter  ^ 
and  the  Circuits  of  Fetcr,^  and  probably  the  still  older 
Preachings  of  Peter, ^  a  Jewish- Christian  writing,  modified  by 
Catholic  hands  into  the  Preaching  of  Peter  and  Paul,^  which 
had  a  harmonising  tendency.  The  Traditions  of  Matthias '' 
and  the  Ascents  of  James  ^  have  already  been  referred  to ; 
they  probably  represent  a  similar  motive  among  the  Gnostics 
and  the  Ebionites  respectively. 

The  Acts  of  Apostles,  strictly  so  called,  were  at  first  mainly 
Judaeo-Christian.  They  provided  missionary  enterprises  for 
all  the  Twelve,  though  some  were  more  fully  dealt  with  than 
others.  S.  Paul's  name  is  conspicuous  by  its  absence.  The 
Catholic  party,  in  adopting  these  fictitious  Acts,  seem  to  have 
had  no  suspicion  of  the  Judaising  fabrications  that  underlay 
them,  chief  of  which  is  the  world-wide  activity  and  double 
episcopate  of  S.  Peter,  first  at  Antioch,  then  at  Rome. 

^  The  writer  is  indebted  for  most  of  these  details  to  the  article  in 
Smith's  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography. 

-  Atard^ets  tQv  diroaTSXcdu,  or  dcdaxal  tQjv  airoaToKiov. 

^  KpLfia  Uerpov,  Judicium  Petri,  or  Duce  Vice,  known  to  Clement  of 
Alexandria.  "*  The  basis  of  the  Clementine  Recognitions. 

^  Krjpuy/xaTa  Uerpov.  ''  K-qpvyixa  lierpov  /cat  IlavXov. 

^  Trapadoaeis  Marr^tou.  **  dua^adfxoi  'la/cw/Sou. 


176  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

The  original  sources  of  this  romantic  literature  are  four- 
fold— (i)  Ebionite;  (2)  Gnostic;  (3)  Catholic;  (4)  Gnostic- 
Ebionite,.  Catholically  revised. 

Of  the  Ebionite  documents  we  possess  little  more  than  the 
names,  and  of  these  most  have  been  already  given.  The  one 
of  most  interest  for  us  is  the  Circuits  of  Peter,  which  has 
been  recast  and  amplified  in  the  Clementine  writings.  The 
Acts  of  Fcter  in  Home  was  also  an  Ebionite  work.  It  con- 
tained a  dramatic  account  of  the  death  of  Simon  Magus  at 
Rome  and  S.  Peter's  crucifixion,  including  the  exquisite 
legend  of  the  Domine,  quo  vadis  ?  This  was  incorporated  into 
the  Catholic  Acts  of  SS.  Peter  and  Paul,  which,  in  their  pre- 
sent form,  are  not  earlier  than  the  fifth  century,  but  in  more 
primitive  recensions  {Ads  of  Paul)  are  referred  to  by  Origen. 

The  Gnostic  Acts  were  generally  supposed  to  have  emanated 
from  the  pen  or  the  school  of  Leucius  Charinus.  Who  Leucius 
was,  or  whether  he  existed  at  all,  it  is  impossible  to  say.  He 
was  said  to  have  been  a  younger  contemporary,  perhaps  a 
disciple,  of  S.  John  at  E^^hesus,  and  to  have  vexed  the  Apostle 
by  promulgating  error.  But  the  testimonies  to  his  personality 
are  not  earlier  than  the  fourth  century,  when  he  sometimes 
appears  as  a  Manichgean,  sometimes  as  an  inspirer  (real  or 
supposed)  of  the  Montanists.  It  is  best  to  regard  his  name 
as  a  convenient  peg  on  which  to  hang  the  anonymous  apocry- 
phal Acts.  These  Acts  are  certainly  early,  and  may  go  back 
as  far  as  the  supposed  age  of  Leucius.  The  Leucian  legends 
are  generally  of  an  Encratite  character,  and  were  widely  cir- 
culated. In  one  of  them  S.  John  is  said  to  have  been 
miraculously  cured  of  the  desire  for  marriage,  in  another  to 
have  been  immersed  in  boiling  oil,  but  rendered  invulnerable 
by  his  purity.  It  is  possible  also  that  the  beautiful  story  of 
S.  John's  unvvillingness  to  compose  a  Gospel,  and  how  this 
unwillingness  was  overcome  by  a  revelation,  and  how  in  the 
presence  of  the  brethren  he  burst  forth  with  the  inspired 
words  of  the  Prologue,  may  be  due  to  the  same  source. 

There  was  an  immense  number  of  such  stories  current, 
some  exquisitely  beautiful,  some  grotesque,  others  super- 
stitious and  childish  ;  but  all  so  suited  to  the  popular  taste 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  177 

that  the  Church,  being  unable  to  compete  with  them,  adopted 
the  sagacious  course  of  recasting,  expurgating,  and  adopting 
them. 

The  following  passage  from  Lipsius  ^  expresses  with  such 
admirable  clearness  the  attractive  features  of  these  writings, 
that  for  the  reader's  benefit  we  transcribe  it  in  full : — "  That 
this  process  of  purification  was  not  always  complete  need  not 
surprise  us  when  we  consider  how  changeable  and  uncertain 
on  some  points  was  the  boundary-line  between  Gnostic  and 
Catholic  doctrines.  In  general,  however,  these  Gnostic  pro- 
ductions betray  their  origin  by  the  over-growths  of  a  luxu- 
riant imagination,  by  their  highly-coloured  pictures,  and  by 
their  passionate  love  for  mythical  additions  and  adornments, 
in  excess  even  of  the  popular  belief  in  signs  and  wonders. 
The  favourite  critical  canon,  '  The  more  romantic  the  more 
recent  in  origin,'  does  not  hold  good  as  against  this  branch 
of  literature,  in  which  exorcisings  of  demons,  raisings  of 
the  dead,  and  other  miracles  of  healing  or  of  punishment, 
are  multiplied  endlessly.  The  incessant  repetition  of  like 
wonders  bafiles  the  efforts  of  the  most  lively  imagination  to 
avoid  a  certain  monotony,  interrupted,  however,  by  dialogues 
and  prayers,  which  not  seldom  afford  a  pleasant  relief,  and 
are  sometimes  of  a  genuinely  poetical  character.  There  is 
withal  a  rich  apparatus  of  the  supernatural,  consisting  of 
visions,  angelic  appearances,  voices  from  heaven,  speaking 
animals  and  demons,  who  with  shame  confess  their  impotence 
against  the  champions  of  the  truth;  unearthly  streams  of 
light  descend,  or  mysterious  signs  appear,  from  heaven ; 
earthquakes,  thunders  and  lightnings  terrify  the  ungodly  ; 
the  elements  of  wind,  and  fire,  and  water  minister  to  the 
righteous;  wild  beasts,  dogs  and  serpents,  lions,  bears  and 
tigers  are  tamed  by  a  single  word  from  the  mouth  of  the 
Apostles,  or  turn  their  rage  against  the  persecutors;  dying 
martyrs  are  encompassed  by  wreaths  of  light  or  heavenly 
roses  and  lilies  and  enchanting  odours,  while  the  abyss  opens 
to  devour  their  enemies.  The  devil  himself  is  often  intro- 
duced into  these  stories  in  the  form  of  a  black  Ethiopian,  and 
1  Article  on  the  Apocryphal  Acts  in  the  Biographical  Dictionary. 

M 


178  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

plays  a  considerable  part.  But  the  visionary  element  is  the 
favourite  one.  Our  Lord  often  appears  to  His  servants,  now 
as  a  beautiful  youth,  and  again  as  a  seaman,  or  in  the  form  of 
an  Apostle  ;  holy  martyrs  return  to  life  to  manifest  themselves, 
at  one  time  to  their  disciples,  at  another  to  their  persecutors. 
Dreams  and  visions  announce  beforehand  to  Apostles  their 
approaching  martyrdom,  or  to  longing  souls  among  the 
heathen  the  fulfilment  of  their  desires.  All  this  fantastic 
scenery  has  been  left,  for  the  most  part,  untouched  by 
Catholic  revisers,  and  remains  therefore  in  works  which  in 
other  respects  have  been  most  thoroughly  recast.  Yet  it 
was  only  in  very  rare  cases  that  these  romantic  creations  of 
fancy  were  themselves  the  original  object  in  view  with  the 
writers  who  produced  them.  That  object  was  either  some 
dogmatic  interest,  or,  where  such  retired  into  the  back- 
ground, an  ascetic  purpose.  Many  of  these  narratives 
were  simply  invented  to  extol  the  meritoriousness  of  the 
celibate  life,  or  to  commend  the  severest  abstinence  in  the 
estate  of  matrimony.  On  this  point  Catholic  revisers  have 
throughout  been  careful  to  make  regular  systematic  altera- 
tions, now  degrading  legitimate  wives  to  the  condition  of 
concubines,  and  now  introducing  objections  connected  with 
the  nearness  of  kin  or  other  circumstances  which  might 
justify  the  refusal  or  repudiation  of  a  given  marriage.  But 
where  merely  the  praise  of  virginity  was  concerned,  the 
views  of  Catholics  and  Gnostics  were  nearly  identical,  except 
that  the  former  refused  to  regard  the  maintenance  of  that 
estate  as  an  absolute  or  universal  moral  obligation." 

The  titles  of  the  Gnostic  Acts  were  numerous.  There 
were  Acts  of  Peter  attributed  to  Linus,  the  disciple  of  Apostles 
and  first  bishop  of  Eome ;  Acts  of  Paul,  also  ascribed  to 
Linus  (both  these  were  superseded  by  orthodox  redactions, 
the  Passio  Petri  and  Passio  Pauli) ;  Acts  of  Anclreio,  Philip, 
and  Barnahas,  all  forming  detached  portions  of  what  we  may 
call  the  Christian  Epic  Cycle,  the  extent  of  which  must  have 
been  simply  enormous.  The  Acts  of  TJiomas,  John,  and 
Thaddeus  are  also  known.  The  last  is  probably  the  authority 
for  the  letters  of  Abgarus  and  Christ. 


EARLY  APOCRYPHAL  LITERATURE.  179 

The  Acts  of  Paul  and  Thecla  have  been  so  recast  as  to  lose 
their  heretical  colouring.  They  go  back  to  the  second  cen- 
tury, are  cited  by  Tertullian,  and  form  a  sort  of  romance  of 
asceticism.  Paul,  accompanied  by  the  traitor  Demas,  arrives 
at  Iconium,  where  he  preaches  a  gospel  of  continence, 
and  wins  over  Thecla,  the  daughter  of  his  host.  He  is 
brought  before  the  tribunals  as  a  Christian,  and  seeks 
safety  in  flight.  Thecla  follows  him  from  place  to  place, 
and  becomes  an  ardent  disciple.  She  is  seized  and  con- 
demned to  be  burnt,  but  the  flames  will  not  touch  her. 
Paul  then  baptizes  her.  At  Antioch  her  resolve  of  chastity 
again  exposes  her  to  persecution,  but  she  is  protected  by  an 
old  woman  whose  daughter's  spirit  appears  in  a  dream  and 
craves  the  prayers  of  the  virgin  Thecla  to  help  her  to  heaven. 
This  is  the  first  appearance  of  the  intercession  of  the  saints. 
She  is  represented  as  the  pearl  of  monachal  virginity. 

Besides  these  Acts,  there  are  a  few  anomalous  apocryphal 
works  belonging  to  the  first  three  centuries,  to  which  we  may 
just  allude.  Such  are  the  Apocalypse  of  Moses,  possibly  a 
fragment  of  some  larger  work.  This  contained  the  account 
of  Adam  and  Eve's  death,  and  the  story  of  Seth's  discovery 
of  the  Oil  of  Comfort.  The  grandeur  of  thought  and  poetical 
cast  of  the  language  made  this  legend  widely  popular.  It 
represented  Adam  and  Eve  in  truly  noble  proportions,  and 
invested  their  history  with  lofty  pathos.  It  is  noticeable 
that  while  dogmatic  writers  generally  insist  upon  the  sin 
and  imperfection  of  Adam,  the  popular  mythology  invariably 
dwells  on  his  higher  attributes  as  the  protoplast,'  created  in 
the  Divine  image.  Other  documents  referring  to  him  were 
the  Apocalypse  of  Adam  and  the  Testament  of  Adam,  which 
are  said  to  betray  traces  of  Persian  influence. 

The  tendency  of  all  this  literature  which  we  have  thus 
cursorily  reviewed  is  primarily  to  give  a  concrete  form  to  the 
ideas  of  Christianity.  From  a  literary  point  of  view  it  may 
be  likened  to  the  mass  of  Epic  poetry  which  clustered  round 
the  name  of  Homer.  The  pre-eminent  glory  of  the  Iliad  and 
Odyssey  eclipsed,  but  did  not  extinguish,  the  fainter  bright- 
ness of   many  another  ancient  bard.       Though    unmarked 


i8o  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

by  creative  genius,  these  cyclic  poems  were  treasured  by  later 
ages  as  belonging  to  the  true  birthtime  of  imagination,  and 
thus  renewed  their  life,  reviving  after  a  long  sleep  to  gain 
a  second  currency  in  the  Alexandrine  period.  Just  so  the 
Apocryphal  Gospels  and  Acts,  though  obscured  by  the  excess 
of  light  that  radiated  from  the  inspired  Gospels  of  the  canon, 
nevertheless  23aii;ook  in  some  slight  degree  of  the  same  mys- 
terious vitality ;  and  after  a  period  of  depression  and  neglect 
were  able  to  reassert  their  claims  to  a  hearing,  and  to  secure 
no  inconsiderable  recognition  both  in  the  dogma  and  in  the 
hagiological  literature  of  the  Church.  As  has  been  acutely 
remarked,  oral  tradition  is  a  kind  of  universal  suffrage,  which, 
as  soon  as  it  finds  articulate  expression,  rests  not  until  it  is 
in  a  position  to  dictate  its  will,  when  it  compels  the  official 
authority,  not  merely  to  recognise,  but  to  consecrate  it. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

ON  GNOSTICISM  IN  GENERAL, 

Haedly  had  the  last  apostolic  voice  died  away  when  the 
Church  was  confronted  with  a  sudden  influx  of  strange  doc- 
trines and  speculations,  which,  by  explaining  away  her  creed, 
threatened  her  very  existence.  Yet  they  did  not  enter  her 
camp  in  the  guise  of  enemies.  They  professed  to  afford 
either  a  purer  statement  of  essential  Christianity  than  that  of 
the  orthodox,  or  a  fuller  explanation  of  its  place  in  the  uni- 
verse, and  so  far  from  abjuring  the  Christian  profession,  they 
claimed  alone  to  retain  it  in  perfection. 

The  Church,  however,  refused  to  admit  this  claim.  She 
resisted  the  intrusion  of  all  elements  which  disagreed  with 
the  apostolic  tradition,  and  her  writers  vindicated  the  wisdom 
of  this  course  by  a  thorough  exposition  of  the  essential  prin- 
ciples of  the  faith.  For  more  than  a  century  the  struggle 
was  carried  on  with  varying  fortunes,  till  in  the  end  orthodox 
belief  triumphed,  and  the  heretics  of  the  second  century,  if 
not  extinguished,  were  at  least  put  to  silence. 

The  order  of  time  requires  that  we  should  first  consider 
the  aberrations  from  Christian  belief,  and  then  the  orthodox 
statement  of  it,  the  former  being  in  fact  the  exciting  cause 
of  the  latter.  It  would  be  impossible  to  appreciate  the  posi- 
tion of  the  great  Apologists  without  some  knowledge  of  the 
external  ideas  they  combated,  as  well  as  of  those  they  adopted. 
Hence  the  necessity  of  a  brief  survey  of  the  leading  heretical 
sects. 

On  the  Rise  of  Heresy. 

Now,  the  first  point  to  make  clear  is,  why  heretics  should 
have  arisen  ?    What  was  it  that  prevented  these  men  from 


r82  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

accepting  the  orthodox  faith  ?  Was  it  simply  the  pride  of 
the  human  intellect  that  led  them  astray,  or  was  it  moral 
laxity,  or  was  it  a  genuine  search  for  truth  ?  The  answer 
will  depend  on  the  evidence,  and  this  varies  in  different  cases. 
But  in  the  case  of  Basilides,  Valentinus,  and  Marcion,  at  any 
rate,  the  evidence  points  to  a  very  high  earnestness  of  pur- 
pose ;  and  our  unfavourable  judgment  on  their  orthodoxy 
must  be  balanced  by  a  due  respect  for  their  good  points. 

When  the  Christian  religion  was  preached  to  the  world,  it 
was  inevitable  that  men's  minds  should  reason  upon  it.  It 
could  not  be  accepted  blindly.  It  must  be  made  to  fit  in 
with  the  system  of  things.  It  was  announced  as  being  at 
once  a  fulfilment  of  Jewish  prophecy  and  a  new  world-em- 
bracing religion.  To  the  Gentile  thinker,  the  Christ  of  the 
Jews  could  not,  primarily  and  as  such,  be  conceived  of  as  the 
Son  of  God  and  Lord  of  the  human  race.  To  occupy  such  a 
position  He  must  be  regarded  in  the  wider  light  of  a  Being 
universal  as  humanity  itself,  and  so  brought  into  an  intelligible 
relation  with  the  past  of  the  Gentile  world.  The  Scriptures 
of  the  New  Testament  offer  no  scientific  definition  of  Christ's 
Person  or  work.  Such  a  definition  can  indeed,  by  a  logical 
process,  be  evolved  from  their  statements ;  but  neither  they 
nor  the  Fathers  of  the  succeeding  age  indicate  what  the  pro- 
cess is.  Hence,  when  men  of  acute  intelligence,  dialectically 
trained,  having  adopted  the  Christian  system,  began  to  ask 
themselves  for  a  reasonable  account  of  their  belief,  they  were 
to  a  large  extent  left  to  their  own  methods,  and  those  methods 
were  the  product  of  heathen  philosoj^hy.  Now,  nothing  is 
more  difficult  than  to  break  one's  mental  continuity.  Moral 
continuity  is  far  more  easily  broken  than  intellectual.  In 
cases  where  a  new  intellectual  system  is  adopted,  the  habits 
and  methods  of  the  old  are  continually  cropping  up.  Now 
the  great  bulk  of  converts  was  made  at  first  from  the  less 
educated  classes,  who  had  no  fixed  system  of  belief.  But 
in  time,  as  the  Gospel  spread,  an  increasing  number  of  cul- 
tured minds  submitted  to  it.  And  many  of  these,  whether 
Jews  or  Gentiles,  retained,  under  an  apparent  acceptance  of 
Christian  teaching,  the  root-ideas  of  their  former  faiths,  from 


ON  GNOSTICISM  IN  GENERAL.  183 

which  they  were  not,  and  perhaps  hardly  desired  to  be, 
emancipated. 

Hence  two  leading  types  of  heresy  arose,  the  Jewish  or 
Ebionite,  and  the  semi-heathen  or  Gnostic.  The  latter,  which 
was  decidedly  the  more  powerful,  exercised  no  small  influence 
on  the  former,  and  produced  a  sort  of  compound  heresy 
which  we  may  call  Gnostic-Ebionite.^  As  the  Ebionite 
Gnostic  systems  made  little  impression  on  the  Catholic 
Church,  being  confined  to  small  and  narrow  communities, 
they  need  not  enter  into  our  consideration  here.  We  shall 
confine  our  present  remarks  to  the  leading  ideas  of  the 
Gentile  Gnostic  systems. 

To  revert  to  our  question,  why  heresies  arose  ?  we  must 
acknowledge  that  in  the  Church  of  the  second  century  con- 
siderable freedom  of  thought  was  permitted.  When  the  entire 
Christian  world  agreed  in  accepting  a  certain  body  of  doctrine, 
we  may  be  sure  that  the  grounds  for  accepting  it  were  very 
strong.  When  the  entire  Christian  world  agreed  in  rejecting 
certain  ideas  as  subversive  of  its  faith,  we  may  be  equally 
sure  that  it  did  not  do  this  without  good  ground.  We  may 
refuse  to  accept  the  bulk  of  the  charges  against  the  lives  of 
the  heretics ;  we  may  give  them  full  credit  for  believing 
their  views  to  be  compatible  with  revelation ;  we  may  even 
admit  their  superiority  in  personal  gifts  to  their  opponents : 
but  we  have  no  hesitation  in  endorsing  the  unanimous 
verdict  of  the  Church  that  Gnosticism  in  all  its  forms  is  sub- 
versive of  Christianity,  and  that  the  Gnostics  were  utterly 
mistaken  in  thinking  the  two  could  be  combined. 

Errors  of  Gnosticism. 

(a.)  Relation  between  Faith  and  Knowledge. 

Their  main  point  of  view  was  the  presentation  of  Chris- 
tianity  as   a    theosophy   or    scheme    of    divine    knowledge 

^  Lightfoot,  in  his  essay  on  Essenism,  prefixed  to  his  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians,  shows  that  Gnosticism  was  a  system  of  thought  existing  before 
Christianity,  and  that  it  had  already  influenced  Judaism  before  the  rise  of 
Jewish  Christianity.  Hence  the  true  analysis  of  Gnostic  Ebionism  would 
be  (Gnostic-Judaism  x  Jewish-Christianity). 


i84  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

(yvcjcTL^),  not  as  a  system  of  faith.  The  Apostle  bids  Christians 
^'  add  to  their  faith  knowledge  ;  "  and  no  doubt  this  knowledge 
is  what  we  should  call  theology.  But  it  is  recommended  as 
an  adjunct  to  faith,  not  as  the  foundation  of  it  or  the  sub- 
stitute for  it.  Christianity  is  primarily  an  intervention  of 
God  in  history,  a  fact  and  not  a  theory.  This  the  Gnostics 
failed  to  perceive ;  and,  accordingly,  they  identified  the 
highest  Christianity  with  a  speculative  system  of  thought,  and 
left  only  a  lower  practical  form  of  it  to  the  sphere  of  faith. 
At  the  same  time,  they  did  good  service  by  revealing  the 
need  of  a  true  Christian  gnosis,  restricted  according  to  the 
Apostle's  words,  and  this  the  Alexandrian  theologians  strove 
not  unsuccessfully  to  supj)ly. 

But  the  whole  difference  lies  in  the  subordination  of  the 
one  element  to  the  other.  In  the  orthodox  gnosis,  the 
license  of  speculation  is  strictly  limited  by  the  data  of  revela- 
tion :  in  the  heretical  gnosis,  revelation  is  forced  to  exj)ress 
itself  in  the  categories  of  speculative  thought.  Moreover,  if 
theology  be  in  the  true  sense  a  science,  its  sphere,  like  that 
of  all  other  sciences,  is  that  of  necessity  and  not  of  freedom. 
Its  conceptions  and  generalisations  are  beyond  the  grasp  of 
the  uninitiated,  and  salvation,  achieved  through  the  intelli- 
gence, becomes  open  only  to  a  few.  This  is  exactly  the 
position  of  Gnosticism.  It  regards  the  difference  between  the 
spiritual  and  carnal  natures  as  inherent  in  the  constitution 
of  things,  and  provides  no  bridge  from  one  to  the  other : 
hence  it  j^ropounds  two  doctrines,  an  esoteric  for  the  elect, 
an  exoteric  for  the  multitude ;  and  two  redemptions,  an 
eternal  union  with  the  Deity  for  the  spiritual,  and  a  lower 
beatitude  for  the  carnal. 

It  practically  adopts  the  proud  motto  of  the  Academy, 
"  Let  no  one  ignorant  of  science  enter  here,"^  thus  placing 
itself  in  direct  contradiction  to  the  position  laid  down  by 
Christ,  "I  thank  Thee,  Father,  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth, 
because  Thou  hast  hid  these  things  from  the  wise  and  pru- 
dent, and  hast  revealed  them  unto  babes."  ^  The  essence  of 
Christian  doctrine  lies  in  its  openness  to  all.     There  is  not 

^   fxrjdels  dyeto/ji€Tp7]Tos  eia-lroj.  -  S.  Matt.  xi.  25. 


ON   GNOSTICISM   IN   GENERAL.  185 

one  teaching  for  the  poor,  another  for  the  rich :  one  revela- 
tion for  the  wise,  another  for  the  ignorant.  What  Christ 
taught  His  apostles,  that  they  taught  their  disciples — that, 
and  nothing  else,  they  embodied  in  their  writings.  Such  is 
the  first  and  most  fatal  error  of  Gnosticism. 


(b.)  Dualism. 

Its  second  error  is  its  inability  to  disengage  itself  from  the 
conceptions  of  Paganism,  and  more  especially  of  oriental 
Dualism.  It  never  really  adopted  the  Christian  idea  of  God, 
as  at  once  the  Eternal  Spirit  and  Source  of  Being,  and  also 
the  Personal  Father  and  Governor  of  the  universe  that  He 
has  made.  Substantially  this  idea  is  drawn  from  the  Old 
Testament,  reaffirmed  and  filled  up  by  Jesus  Christ.  But 
Christian  thought  has  incorporated  with  it  the  conception  of 
Deity  as  the  One  Absolute  Existence  and  the  Ultimate  First 
Cause,  which  belongs  to  Greek  philosophy.  This  compound 
conception,  which  is  enshrined  in  our  first  Article  of  Keligion,^ 
is  a  legitimate  fusion  of  two  modes  of  thought,  which,  com- 
bined in  the  first  instance  by  Philo,  have  ever  since  mutually 
co-operated  to  form  the  body  of  Catholic  dogma. 

But  the  pure  metaphysical  notion,  which  sufficed  for  the 
best  thinkers  of  Greece,  had,  in  the  times  we  speak  of,  suffered 
grievous  deterioration.  The  abstract  thought  of  the  Eastern 
world,  though  professedly  Greek  in  character,  invariably 
sought  to  embody  itself  in  symbolic  intuitions,  which  it  pro- 
ceeded immediately  to  clothe  with  a  vague  spiritual  person- 
ality. Unable  to  maintain  itself  on  the  level  of  truly  abstract 
thought,  it  projected  its  fundamental  conceptions  in  the 
form  of  a  hierarchy  of  mysterious  beings  or  powers,  called 
^ons,  which  in  their  origin  are  nothing  but  hypostatised 
attributes  of  the  inscrutable  Source  of  Being,  but  which 
came  to  be  regarded  either  as  inferior  deities,  or  angels,  or 
daemons,   to  whom  were  assigned  the  various   domains  of 

1  "There  is  but  one  living  and  true  God,  everlasting,  without  body, 
parts,  or  passions,  of  infinite  power,  wisdom  and  goodness,  the  maker 
and  preserver  of  all  things,  both  visible  and  invisible." 


i86  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

creative,  redemptive,  or  administrative  agency.  On  some 
Jewish  minds  these  ideas  exercised  a  strong  attractive  power 
from  their  contrast  with  the  bare,  stern  monotheism  of  later 
Judaism,  and  from  the  facility  with  which  they  seemed 
reconcilable  with  the  angelology  of  the  Old  Testament.  To 
the  strictly  Hellenic  mode  of  thought  they  were  far  less 
conformable,  though  there  is  one  aspect  of  Plato's  teaching 
that  finds  room  for  them.  Moreover,  we  must  remember 
that  the  Hellenism  of  this  epoch  was  mixed  with  alien 
elements,!  and  many  of  its  most  distinguished  exponents 
were  born  in  climes  far  removed  from  the  sober  and  clear- 
thinking  influences  of  European  Greece. 

But  there  was  another  element  in  oriental  philosophy 
even  less  capable  of  harmonisation  with  Christianity  than 
its  mythological  spiritualism.  We  allude  to  its  fundamental 
Dualism,  viz.,  the  eternal  antagonism  between  the  supreme 
God  and  some  other  force  or  power  which  confronted  him  on 
a  footing  of  equality,  at  any  rate  in  the  present  world.  In 
theory,  no  doubt,  all  Gnostics  admitted  the  Unity  of  the 
Divine  Essence.  But  in  order  to  maintain  its  purity  un- 
sullied, they  refused  to  allow  the  possibility  of  any  direct 
contact  between  the  incommunicable  Godhead  and  the  visible 
world.  To  them  the  first  source  of  created  being  was  derived 
from  an  original  self-consciousness,  involving  a  necessary 
self-limitation,  on  the  part  of  God.  This  was  the  first  passing 
of  the  hidden  essence  into  manifestation,  first  to  itself,  then, 
by  various  intermediate  acts  not  so  much  of  volition  as  of 
a  kind  of  organic  development,-  to  the  emanations  from 
itself,  which,  in  successive  degrees  of  declining  purity,  it 
threw  forth.  This  obscure  and  difficult  theory  need  only 
be  noticed  here  in  so  far  as  it  affects  the  Christian  doctrines 
of  Creation  and  the  nature  of  the  principle  of  evil.  As  it 
bore  directly  upon  these,  a  few  words  on  these  two  points  may 

1  This  is  pre-eminently  true  of  Plutarch,  who,  though  born  in  Greece 
proper,  shows  a  strong  leaning  to  the  corrupted  orientalised  forms  of 
Platonic  doctrine. 

-  Or  "  pullulation  "  (Trpo/SoXiJ).  The  process  may  be  compared  to  the  repro- 
duction of  the  zoophyte,  with  the  addition  of  self -consciousness. 


ON   GNOSTICISM   IN   GENERAL.  187 

not  be  out  of  place.  To  take  the  latter  first.  On  the  emana- 
tion hypothesis  above  given,  it  is  evident  that  the  ultimate 
source  of  evil  must  be  God  Himself.  But  this,  which  is  the 
doctrine  of  Monism,  would,  if  logically  worked  out,  involve 
the  inconsistency  of  a  double  nature  in  the  Deity,  at  once 
bad  and  good.  But  this  was  too  repulsive.  It  was  therefore 
softened  down  by  the  conception  of  evil  as  the  negative,  the 
unreal,  the  non-existent,  the  realm  of  darkness,  the  privation 
of  light.  But,  as  a  rule,  a  more  pronounced  dualism  was 
held.  The  origin  of  evil  was  sought  either  in  the  remoteness 
of  the  stage  of  emanation  from  the  primal  deity,  or  in  an  act 
of  individual  volition  ^  on  the  part  of  one  of  the  asons,  or  in 
the  essential  nature  of  matter  howsoever  formed  ;  or  else  it 
was  held  to  be  the  characteristic  operation  of  a  secondary  or 
antagonistic  deity,  according  as  the  Alexandrian  or  Syrian 
type  of  Gnosticism  prevailed.  To  Plato  evil  had  no  place  in 
the  world  of  ideas,  but  was  inextricably  interwoven  with  the 
world  of  sense  as  a  necessary  condition  of  the  manifestation 
of  good ;  hence  to  rise  above  the  world  of  sense  altogether 
and  contemplate  the  idea  in  its  purity  was  the  only  escape 
from  earthly  imperfection. 2  But  this  being  impossible  to  a 
composite  nature,  the  idea  of  a  redemption  of  the  sensible 
world  was  logically  involved  in  his  system.  And  in  this 
way  the  Christian  Platonists  of  Alexandria^  may  be  said 
to  have  bridged  a  path  from  Plato  to  Christ.  But  the 
Gnostics  carried  out  their  theory  of  redemption  on  lines 
fundamentally  different  from  those  of  the  Catholic  thinkers. 
Just  as  Philo  in  reconciling  Plato  with  Moses  had  abandoned 
the  true  view  of  Creation  as  an  act  of  the  Divine  Will,  and 
fitted  it  into  his  system  as  a  cosmological  fact  or  process, 
exactly  so  did  the  Gnostic  teachers  deny  the  essential  char- 
acter of  redemption  as  an  act  of  free  grace,  and  relegate  it 
to  the  sphere  of  cosmological  necessity. 

^  More  correctly  "desire"  or  "dissatisfaction."  In  this  view  we  can 
trace  the  influence  of  the  Buddhist  philosophy,  which  practically  identifies 
evil  not  with  the  material  world,  but  with  the  desire  which  in  that  philo- 
sophy is  regarded  as  the  source  of  the  material  world. 

2  Theaetetus,  p.  176  A.  ^  Clement  and  Origen. 


i88  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

Thus  they  were  inexorably  led  by  their  logic  to  explain 
away  the  reality  of  Christ's  manhood,  and  to  adopt  the 
strange  theory  known  as  Docetism,  which  denied  to  the 
Redeemer  not  only  the  possession  of  true  human  nature, 
but  any  direct  contact  with  the  limited  and  contingent. 
They  thus  cut  at  the  root  of  all  true  Christianity,  and  amply 
justified  the  Church  in  her  incessant  polemic  against  them. 
Moreover,  by  confining  the  work  of  redemption  to  the  spiritual 
enlightenment  of  such  natures  as  were  already  spiritually 
constituted,  they  drifted  away  from  the  Christian  doctrine 
of  its  universality,  and  from  its  vital  application  to  the 
moral  regeneration  of  mankind.  And  the  erroneous  con- 
clusions they  drew,  not  only  in  theoiy  but  in  practice,  formed 
one  of  the  strongest  arguments  advanced  by  the  Church 
against  them. 

(c.)  Effect  on  Morals. 

It  is  true  we  must  receive  these  pictures  of  moral  corrup- 
tion with  caution,  for  the  method  of  discrediting  people's 
opinions  by  condemning  their  practice  is  too  familiar  to 
students  of  theology  to  be  much  regarded  except  in  cases 
where  it  can  be  established  by  something  better  than  mere 
assertion.  Making,  however,  every  allowance  for  the  ^Dreju- 
dices  of  their  opponents,  we  believe  there  is  good  ground  for 
concluding  that  the  ultra-dualistic  schools  at  any  rate,  misled 
by  their  false  views  of  matter,  put  forward  a  radically  erro- 
neous moral  ideal,  either  recommending  asceticism,  i.e.,  a 
complete  subjugation  of  the  body,  as  the  essential  condition 
of  spiritual  freedom,  or  else  permitting  unbridled  indulgence 
in  fleshly  desires,  to  secure  the  undisturbed  tranquillity  of 
the  immaterial  part.  We  see  in  these  different  views  a 
counterpart  of  the  Greek  philosophic  schools,  in  which  those 
who  held  pleasure  to  be  the  supreme  good  (Cyrenaics  and 
Epicureans),  gradually  came  to  recommend  instead  of  it  an 
apathetic  indifference  to  everything ;  while  those  which  held 
up  a  sterner  and  more  ascetic  ideal  (Cynics)  at  last  jDermitted 
the  grossest  forms  of  vice,  if  mental  immobility  could  be 
attained  in  no  other  way. 


ON  GNOSTICISM   IN   GENERAL.  189 

(d.)  Theokies  of  Ckeation. 

Next,  as  to  the  question  of  Creation.  Here  the  divergence 
between  the  two  systems  is  traceable  to  the  same  fundamental 
difficulty,  viz.,  how  to  connect  the  incommunicable  essence 
on  the  one  hand,  with  matter  on  the  other.  It  seemed  in- 
conceivable to  the  Gnostic  that  this  world,  with  all  its  imper- 
fection, should  have  been  created  directly  by  God.  They 
therefore  account  for  it  by  a  theory  which  combines  the 
fancies  of  the  Tim^us  with  the  doctrine  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. 1  The  Creator  of  the  world  is  to  them  not  the  Supreme 
Deity  but  the  Demiurge,  a  limited  secondary  god,  who  re- 
ceives his  power  from  the  Supreme,  but  is  ignorant  of  his 
limitation.  This  Being  revealed  himself  to  the  Jews  as  the 
Creator,  which  in  truth  he  was ;  as  the  God  of  righteousness, 
which,  in  the  narrow  sense  of  retributive  justice,  he  was  also ; 
and,  finally,  as  the  supreme  and  only  Deity,  which  he  was 
not.  No  small  part  of  their  theory  is  taken  up  with  defin- 
ing the  relation  of  the  Demiurge  to  the  Eternal  God,  some 
thinkers  regarding  it  as  one  of  obedient  inferiority,  others 
as  one  of  hostility.  None  of  them  accept  in  their  obvious 
sense  the  words  of  Genesis,  that  "  God  saw  all  that  He  had 
made,  and  behold  it  was  very  good."  The  majority,  on  the 
contrary,  regard  it  as  evil ;  and  whether  they  attribute  it  to 
an  automatic  process,  to  a  Demiurge,  or  an  angel,  they  all 
agree  in  holding  that  its  final  goal  of  perfection  consists  in 
some  form  of  reabsor]3tion  into  the  primal  essence,  or  in  the 
annihilation  of  such  elements  as  are  incapable  of  absorption. 

Effects  of  Gnosticism. 

Before  proceeding  to  give  a  brief  sketch  of  the  most 
influential  Gnostic  teachers,  we  may  add  a  few  words  on  the 
general  position  of  Gnosticism  in  the  evolution  of  Christian 
thought. 

^  We  need  not  particularise  the  different  shapes  this  theory  took.  On 
the  principle  of  the  amount  of  evil  being  determined  by  the  remoteness  of 
the  emanation,  it  is  generally  held  that  the  Creator  of  this  visible  world 
held  but  a  low  place  in  the  hierarchy  of  spirits. 


190  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

Its  great  service  at  once  to  the  Church  and  to  humanity 
consisted  in  this,  that  it  compelled  the  Christian  conscious- 
ness to  define  its  position  accurately,  both  to  itself  and  in 
the  eyes  of  the  thinking  world.  So  long  as  Christianity  and 
Paganism  were  two  rival  systems,  each  j)romulgating  its  own 
\T.ews  without  any  point  of  contact,  it  might  well  seem  at 
first  sight  that  Paganism  had  a  fair  chance  of  sui-vival ;  but, 
so  soon  as  a  party  arose  claiming  to  represent  the  genuine 
spiritual  doctrine  of  Christ,  and  yet  willing  to  explain  and 
justify  those  very  mythological  ideas  that  the  Church  so 
emphatically  repudiated,  it  was  evident  that  a  crisis  had 
come.  If  a  philosopher  could  embrace  Christianity  without 
sacrificing  his  philosophy,  the  Church  obviously  did  not  un- 
derstand her  mission.  Hence  the  struggle  with  Gnosticism, 
as  afterwards  with  Arianism,  was  really  a  vital  one ;  and  the 
effect  of  Gnostic  teaching  upon  morals,  upon  discipline,  and 
upon  worship,  was  a  legitimate  subject  for  the  Christian 
controversialist,  in  which  he  was  not  slow  to  ^Derceive  his 
great  advantage. 

Another  involuntary  service  of  Gnosticism  to  the  cause  of 
true  religion  was  the  obligation  it  brought  upon  the  Church 
of  distinctly  asserting  the  paramount  importance  of  faith. 
The  Gnostics  allowed  the  sufficiency  of  faith  for  the  psychici 
or  carnally-minded  multitude  ;  but  the  pneumatici  or  spiritual 
believers  lived  in  a  higher  state  of  immediate  knowledge, 
which  raised  them  into  what  was  virtually  a  different  world. 
Now  this  opposition  between  knowledge  and  faith  was  by 
no  means  unknown  to  Judaism ;  and  with  other  elements  of 
Judaism  it  might  well  have  crept  into  the  Church,  had  it  not 
been  for  the  salutary  manifestation  of  its  results  displayed  in 
the  Gnostic  doctrines.  The  Church  was  forcibly  recalled  to 
the  exposition  of  the  nature  of  faith  given  by  S.  Paul ;  and 
the  great  principle  was  re-established  that  faith  is  the  organ 
whereby  revealed  truth  is  received,  consisting  primarily  not 
in  a  state  of  the  intelligence,  but  in  a  disposition  of  the  heart, 
whereby  the  will  is  subordinated  to  the  revealed  will  of  God, 
in  such  wise  that  the  intelligence  is  illumined  by  the  Divine 
Spiiit  in    and  through  the  obedience  of  faith.      The  vain 


ON  GNOSTICISM   IN  GENERAL.  191 

figment  of  an  exoteric  and  esoteric  doctrine,  founded  on  mis- 
interpretation of  Christ's  parables  and  of  certain  passages  of 
S.  Paul,  was  clearly  met  and  once  for  all  refuted.  And  the 
universal  applicability  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ  to  all  orders  of 
intelligence,  wherein  consists  its  true  catholicity  and  its  pro- 
mise of  regenerating  mankind,  was  triumjDhantly  vindicated. 
It  must  be  said,  in  justice  to  the  Gnostics,  that  in  one 
important  respect  they  showed  themselves  able  to  appreciate 
the  system  which  in  other  respects  they  perverted.  In  their 
recognition  of  the  coming  of  Christ  as  the  turning-point  in 
the  world's  history,  they  do  not  yield  to  the  most  orthodox 
of  their  opponents.  It  was  indeed  impossible  to  state  this 
idea  in  more  emphatic  terms,  though  their  apprehension  of 
it  was  confined  to  a  single  aspect.  "When  the  Gnostic 
systems  (we  quote  from  Neander)  describe  the  amazement 
which  was  produced  in  the  kingdom  of  the  Demiurge  by 
the  appearance  of  Christ  as  the  manifestation  of  a  new  and 
mighty  principle  which  had  entered  the  precincts  of  this 
lower  world,  they  give  us  to  understand  how  powerful  was 
the  impression  which  the  contemplation  of  the  life  of  Christ, 
and  of  his  influence  on  humanity,  had  left  on  the  minds  of 
the  founders  of  these  systems,  making  all  earlier  institutions 
seem  to  them  as  nothing  in  comparison  with  Christianity. 
It  appeared  to  them  as  the  commencement  of  the  great 
revolution  in  the  history  of  mankind.  The  ideas  of  the 
adjustment  of  the  disturbed  harmony  of  the  universe;  of 
the  restoration  of  a  fallen  creation  to  its  original  source ; 
of  the  reunion  of  earth  with  heaven;  of  a  revelation  to 
man  of  an  ineffable  Godlike  life  transcending  the  limits  of 
mere  human  nature;  of  a  new  process  of  development 
having  entered  into  the  whole  system  of  the  terrestrial 
world — such  were  the  ideas  which  henceforth  formed  the 
centre  of  these  systems.  The  distinctive  aim  of  the  Gnostics 
was  to  apprehend  the  appearance  of  Christ,  and  the  new 
creation  proceeding  from  Him,  in  their  connection  with  the 
evolution  of  the  whole  universe.  In  a  theogonical  and  cos- 
mogonical  process,  remounting  to  the  original  ground  of  all 
existence,  everything  is  referred  backwards  and  forwards  to 


192  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

the  fact  of  Christ's  appearance.  What  S.  Paul  says  respect- 
ing the  connection  of  redemption  with  creation,  they  made 
the  centre  of  a  speculative  system,  and  endeavoured  to 
understand  it  speculatively." 

It  is  this  speculative  pretension  that  constitutes  at  once 
their  glory  and  their  shame.  If  the  speculative  intellect 
could  have  penetrated  the  mysteries  of  redemption,  those 
inner  secrets  of  the  Divine  Counsel  which  the  angels 
desire  to  look  into,  we  may  well  believe  that  these  subtle, 
bold,  and  truly  earnest  inquirers  would  have  arrived  at 
results,  if  not  absolutely,  at  least  partially  true,  and  most 
useful  to  Christian  theology.  But  they  had  misread  the 
fundamental  lesson  of  the  Incarnation,  and  the  character 
of  Christ;  they  drew  their  inspiration  from  the  Pagan 
idea  of  the  human  spirit  rising  by  abstraction  into  the 
Divine,  not  from  the  Christian  teaching  of  the  coming  down 
of  God  to  tabernacle  with  men,  and  the  indwelling  of  the 
Divine  Spirit  as  the  source  of  wisdom  in  the  contrite  and 
humble  soul.  Hence  the  interest  of  their  theories  is  for 
us  mainly  historical.  Though  it  would  be  unjust  not  to 
acknowledge  the  ability  with  which  they  approached  such 
questions  as  the  canon  of  Holy  Scripture,  the  doctrine  of 
Inspiration,  and  the  relation  of  the  Old  Testament  to  the 
New ;  yet  their  repudiation  of  the  first  principle  of  Christian 
gnosis,  viz.,  the  submission  of  the  intellect  to  the  revelation 
as  given  in  Holy  Scripture,  is  enough  to  vitiate  their  entire 
method,  and  to  render  them  conspicuous  examples  of  what  a 
true  religious  philosophy,  if  it  is  to  be  Christian,  must  avoid. 

Finally,  we  must  not  omit  to  mention  an  indirect  but  very 
real  service  rendered  by  the  Gnostics  to  the  Christian  Church, 
viz.,  the  bringing  into  prominence  the  importance  of  a  written 
canon  of  inspired  doctrine.  They  professed  themselves 
anxious  to  harmonise  their  views  with  the  accepted  docu- 
ments of  the  Church.  Now,  in  those  early  times,  the  canon 
of  the  New  Testament  was  by  no  means  settled.  No  doubt 
the  great  majority  of  its  writings  were  in  circulation,  and 
received  with  general  reverence.  But  other  writings  of  a 
different  level  of  excellence  were  also  current,  and  in  some 


ON   GNOSTICISM   IN   GENERAL.  193 

quarters  received  as  Scripture.  Moreover,  apocryphal  books 
were  in  circulation  purporting  to  proceed  from  apostles  and 
their  followers,  which,  as  containing  heretical  teaching,  it  was 
imperatively  necessary  for  the  Church  to  reject.  This  led  to 
a  thorough  investigation  of  the  question  what  writings  were 
to  be  considered  as  genuine  and  what  were  to  be  disregarded 
or  repudiated.  The  investigation  was  not  conducted  by  the 
whole  Church  in  common,  nor  was  any  authoritative  stamp 
put  upon  any  set  of  writings  by  any  synodical  act.  But  the 
general  consciousness  of  Christendom  agreed,  by  a  sort  of 
tacit  understanding,  to  accept  only  those  which  had  come 
down  to  it  properly  accredited.  The  Gnostics,  though  from 
mixed  motives,  were  really  the  pioneers  in  this  movement. 
The  bold  and  unscrupulous  way  in  which  they  interpreted 
the  Gospels  and  Epistles  in  accordance  with  their  views,  and 
rejected  what  they  could  not  force  into  conformity,  compelled 
the  Church  both  to  examine  the  claims  of  its  ancient  docu- 
ments and  to  arrive  at  some  understanding  how  they  should 
be  interpreted.  It  is  well  known  that  some  heretics,  notably 
Marcion,  used  the  utmost  freedom  in  mutilating  or  rejecting 
the  sacred  texts ;  while  others  endeavoured  to  gain  currency 
for  works  composed  by  themselves  under  the  pseudonym 
of  an  apostle.  The  remarkable  unanimity  with  which  the 
different  churches,  uncompelled  by  any  central  authority, 
accepted  the  greater  part  of  the  New  Testament,  is  a  most 
significant  proof  of  the  adequacy  of  its  attestation.  The 
laborious  process  by  which  this  grand  result  was  established 
is  almost  lost ;  nevertheless  we  can  form  some  idea  of  its 
thoroughness  when  we  observe  that  in  the  time  of  Irengeus 
(180  A.D.)  the  New  Testament,  with  one  or  two  small  excep- 
tions, was  not  only  accepted  in  its  entirety,  but  had  secured 
a  position  of  authority  as  undisputed  as  it  now  enjoys. 


CHAPTER  V. 

FIRST  DIVISION:  GNOSTIC  SECTS  NOT  IN  ANTAGONISM 
TO  J UDA ISM-SIMON^CERINTHUS—DOCETISM. 

Simon  Magus,  the  opponent  of  S.  Peter  and  traditional 
founder  of  heresy,  appears  for  a  moment  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  but  his  historical  character  is  so  overlaid  with 
romance  and  legend  that  it  is  difficult  to  speak  of  him  with 
much  confidence.  It  is  to  Hippolytus  that  we  are  indebted 
for  most  of  the  details  of  his  system.  He  was  a  native  of 
Gitteh  in  Samaria,  and  was  well  versed  in  the  arts  of  magic 
and  theurgy.  His  great  ambition  was  to  be  considered  a 
manifestation  of  the  Deity,  and  no  doubt  this  fact  explains 
his  attempt  to  traffic  with  the  Apostles  for  the  possession  of 
what  he  regarded  as  a  secret  which  they  might  be  expected 
to  offer  for  sale  on  reasonable  terms. 

If  anything  is  certain  about  his  life,  it  is  the  fact  that  he 
united  himself  to  a  courtesan  named  Helena,  whom  he  pur- 
chased at  Tyre,  and  declared  to  be  his  first  Thought  (evvoca), 
who  had  emanated  from  him  in  a  supramundane  stage  of 
existence,  and  whom  he  identified  with  the  lost  sheep  of  our 
Lord's  parable.  His  chief  work  was  called  the  "  Great  Annun- 
ciation," 1  and  was  known  to  Hippolytus  and  Justin.  It 
contained  a  confused  mixture  of  Old  Testament  and  Gnostic 
doctrines,  chiefly  cosmogonical  and  quasi-mystic.  He  seems 
also  to  have  incoi'porated  some  ill-understood  elements  of  the 
Stoic  philosophy.  He  professed  to  dispense  salvation  through 
his  gnosis,  which  had  for  its  primary  object  the  setting  right 
of  the  mismanagement  of  which  the  angel  who  had  been 
entrusted  with  the  care  of  the  world  had  been  guilty.  Though 
in  human  form,  he  was  not  a  man,  but  an  incarnation  of  the 

^  pieyaXr]  dir ocpacTLs.     This  word  admits  also  the  meaning-  "  denial." 

194 


GNOSTIC  SECTS  AND  JUDAISM.  195 

Divine  Being,  manifesting  himself  to  Samaria  as  the  Father, 
to  the  Jews  as  the  8on,  and  to  the  Gentiles  as  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

It  is  only  by  applying  force  to  language  that  his  system 
can  be  called  an  aberration  of  Christianity.  It  is  rather  a 
rival  theory,  bitterly  opposed  in  every  point  to  the  Christiao 
spirit. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  a  sect  of  Simonians  existed  in 
Samaria  in  Justin's  time,  and  probably  in  Eome  also.  And 
it  was  probably  from  the  misrepresentations  of  these  latter 
that  Justin  was  led  to  believe  that  Simon  was  worshipped  at 
Rome  as  a  god.  Origen  ^  informs  us  that  this  sect  (the 
members  of  which  were  also  called  Helenians)  was  almost 
extinct  in  his  day.  It  has  been  conjectured,  not  without 
probability,  that  there  were  really  two  Simons — the  magician 
mentioned  in  the  Acts,  and  another  Simon  of  Gitteh,  separated 
from  the  former  by  about  two  generations,  to  whom  the 
heretical  system  should  properly  be  referred.  One  Dositheus 
is  mentioned  in  the  Clementines  as  an  adherent  of  his  views, 
and  Justin  speaks  of  another  Samaritan  named  Menander, 
who  continued  the  same  heretical  teaching,  probably  about 
thirty  years  before  Justin's  own  time. 

The  doubts  that  hang  over  the  historical  character  of  Simon 
do  not  exist  in  the  case  of  his  contemporary  Cerinthus. 

This  teacher  lies  on  the  border-land  between  the  Ebionites 
and  the  Gnostics,  having  affinities  with  both  systems.  He 
was  of  Egyptian  origin,  and  educated,  no  doubt,  at  Alex- 
andria, in  the  Philonic  school  of  thought.  He  is  said  to  have 
travelled  widely,  visiting  among  other  places  Jerusalem, 
Caesarea  and  Antioch.  His  date  goes  back  to  apostolic 
times,  and  tradition  is  busy  with  his  relations  to  the  Apostles. 
The  following  is  a  summary  of  them : — He  is  said  while  in 
Palestine  to  have  been  one  of  those  who  contended  with 
Peter  because  he  had  eaten  with  Gentiles,  one  of  those  who 
went  out  from  James  and  troubled  the  brethren  at  Antioch, 
one  of  those  who  raised  the  tumult  against  S.  Paul  for  intro- 
ducing Trophimus  into  the  temple,  and  one  of  those  who  are 

1  Cels.  V.  57. 


196  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

stigmatised  by  8.  Panl  as  false  apostles  and  false  brethren. 
The  well-known  story  of  his  meeting  S.  John  in  the  bath  at 
Ephesus  is  of  value  as  an  indication  of  the  strong  feeling  of 
repulsion  with  which  the  Church  of  that  age  regarded  him. 
He  is  also  reported  to  have  rejected  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
and  all  the  Gospels  except  S.  Matthew,  and  from  that  he 
exscinded  the  miraculous  birth.  He  further  maintained  the 
necessity  of  circumcision  for  all  believers  in  Christ. 

Our  knowledge  of  his  doctrines  is  derived  from  the  notices 
in  Iren^us,  Hippolytus,  and  Epiphanius.  He  is  to  be  regarded 
as  the  true  originator  of  Judseo-Christiau  Gnosticism.  The 
great  problem  that  presented  itself  to  his  mind  was  the 
co-existence  of  good  and  evil,  which  he  identified  with  spirit 
and  matter.  The  opposition  between  these  he  described  as 
that  between  the  essentially  perfect  and  that  form  of  passive 
imperfection  which  yet  was  ultimately  dependent  upon  God. 
The  world,  in  his  opinion,  was  created  not  directly  by  God, 
but  by  angels  of  an  inferior  grade  of  emanation.  He  held 
the  God  of  the  Jews  to  be  identical  with  the  Angel  who 
delivered  the  Law,  but  not  with  the  limited  and  inferior 
Creator  of  the  world  as  conceived  by  the  Gnostics.  His 
instinctive  reverence  for  the  Old  Testament,  in  which  he 
contrasts  with  later  theorisers,  kept  his  speculations  within 
bounds. 

On  the  Person  of  our  Saviour  he  entertained  peculiar 
views,  approaching  in  some  respects  to  those  of  Ebionism. 
He  seems,  however,  to  have  allowed  the  truth  of  the  Eesur- 
rection.i  But  the  evidence  for  his  views  is  somewhat  con- 
flicting, and  includes  many  elements  of  a  more  fully  developed 
Gnosticism.  It  seems  certain  that  he  held  strongly  Chiliastic 
beliefs,  of  a  sensuous  and  material  character,  borrowed  from 
the  current  Judaism.  He  is  reported  to  have  prescribed  that 
in  case  a  person  died  unbaptized,  another  should  be  baptized 
in  his  stead.  His  name  gained  a  certain  notoriety  in  the 
Church  from  the  tradition,  apparently  not  unfounded,  that 
S.  John's  writings  were  directed  against  his  views.  Oddly 
enough,  this  tradition  is  counterbalanced  by  another  to  the 
'  This  is,  however,  denied  by  Epiphanius. 


GNOSTIC  SECTS  AND  JUDAISM.  197 

effect  that  Cerinthus  himself  was  the  author  of  both  the 
Apocalypse  and  Gospel  of  S.  John.  The  Chiliastic  images 
of  the  former  book  might  have  afforded  some  siDecious  grounds 
for  this  assertion  ;  while  it  was  thought  that  Cerinthus  might 
have  endeavoured  to  gain  credit  for  his  Christological  doctrine 
by  putting  it  forth  under  the  venerated  name  of  the  Apostle. 
Whether  Cerinthus  taught  that  peculiar  doctrine  of  Christ's 
personality  which  is  known  as  Docetic  is  very  doubtful.  If 
the  Gospel  and  Epistle  of  S.  John  are  really  directed  against 
him,  we  must  suppose  that  he  did.  But  Iren^us  does  not 
mention  his  name  in  this  connection.  He  speaks  of  Simon 
Magus  as  the  first  and  Saturninus  as  the  second,  who  taught 
this  heresy.  The  title  Docetic  is  given  to  that  view  by  which 
the  body  of  Christ  was  supposed  to  be  like  ours  in  appear- 
ance only,  but  in  reality  to  be  impassible  and  immaterial. 
It  was  founded  on  the  prevailing  philosophical  idea  that 
matter  contained  the  original  principle  of  evil,  and  that 
therefore  the  real  union  of  the  divine  and  human  natures  in 
one  Person  was  impossible.  It  is  a  remarkable  testimony  to 
the  early  prevalence  in  the  Church  of  the  ideas  of  Christ's 
pre-existence  and  superhuman  nature,  that  in  the  Gnostic 
sects  which  arose  every  teacher,  with  the  insignificant  excep- 
tions of  Justinus  and  Carpocrates,  while  refusing  to  admit  the 
union  of  both  natures,  denied  the  reality  not  of  the  divine 
but  of  the  human  part.  Saturninus  broached  his  Docetic 
theories  at  Antioch  quite  early  in  the  second  century.  And 
this  fact  is  important  as  throwing  light  on  the  strongly  anti- 
Docetic  passages  in  the  Ignatian  Epistles,  which  used  to  be 
thought  inconsistent  with  their  assumed  early  date,  especi- 
ally as  they  are  absent  from  the  Syriac  recension.  It  is, 
however,  by  no  means  necessary  to  reject  them,  inasmuch  as 
Antioch,  where  Ignatius  dwelt,  was  in  his  time  an  undoubted 
seat  of  this  heretical  tendency.  The  first  assumption  of  the 
name  Docctm  as  the  title  of  a  sect  dates  from  Julius  Cassi- 
anus,  an  Egyptian,  who  lived  probably  towards  the  close  of 
the  second  century,  and  is  chiefly  known  by  the  references 
in  Clement  to  a  work  of  his  called  E.rcgctica,  on  the  compara- 
tive antiquity  of  the  Jewish  and  Pagan  systems. 


198  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

In  one  sense  all  Gnostics  were  Docetics,  because  they  all 
thonght  that  the  real  work  of  redemption  was  done  by  the 
spiritual  Christ  and  not  by  the  man  Jesus.  But  this  is  not 
the  ordinary  sense  of  the  term,  which  means  rather  that  He 
who  appeared  to  be  true  man  was  not  in  reality  such.  The 
Docetic  theories  of  Valentinus  and  Marcion  will  be  discussed 
under  their  resp)ective  headings. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

FIRST  DIVISION  CONTINUED  .—BASILIDES  AND 
THE  PSEUDO-BASILIDEANS. 

Basilides  (tior.  a.d.  i  17-138?),  the  subtle  thinker,  who 
shares  with  Valentinus  the  distinction  of  being  selected  by 
opponents  as  the  representative  of  Gnosticism,  called  himself 
the  disciple  of  Glancias,  interpreter  of  S.  Peter.  Whoever 
Glaucias  may  have  been,  if  he  ever  existed,  we  need  not  sup- 
pose that  Basilides  learnt  his  Christianity  anywhere  else  than 
at  Alexandria,  where  sach  elements  of  Syrian  gnosis  as  we 
find  in  his  system  were  well  known,  and  where  it  is  almost 
certain  that  he  flourished  and  taught  during  the  reign  of 
Hadrian.  His  chief  treatise  was  called  Exegetica,  a  com- 
mentary on  the  Gospel  in  twenty-four  books,  which  was 
answered  by  Agrippa  Castor. ^  Origen  further  attributes  to 
him  an  ajoocryphal  gospel  which  he  calls  "The  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  Basilides ;  "  but  as  to  the  reality  of  this  work  there  is 
considerable  doubt.- 

Our  main  authorities  for  his  teaching  are  Irenseus,  the 
anonymous  supplement  to  Tertullian's  Prcescriptio  adversus 
Hccrcticos,  the  lost  ComjMJidium  of  Hippolytus  preserved  in 
part  by  Epiphanius,  the  Stromateis  of  Clement,  and  the  Bc- 
futation  of  Heresies  of  Hippolytus. 

Of  these  the  two  latter  are  the  most  important.  Both  in 
point  of  date,  and  of  ability  to  weigh  the  evidence  before 
them,  they  are  entitled  to  high  consideration.  At  first  sight 
they  seem  to  disagree,  and  this  disagreement  has  given 
occasion  for  regarding  both  with  suspicion ;  but  it  can  be 
explained  by  the  fact  that  the  two  authors  are  dealing  with 
different  portions  of  Basilides'  system.     Clement  is  criticising 

1  Cf.  Eus.  II.  E.  iv.  7.  -  See  Book  III.  ch.  3. 


200  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

his  moral  theory,  Hippolytus  his  cosmogony.  Allowing  for 
this,  their  testimony  is  by  no  means  so  inconsistent  as  at 
first  sight  it  appears.  If  we  possessed  the  Hypotyposes  of 
Clement,  which  dealt  with  the  cosmical  theories  of  Basilides, 
we  should  doubtless  find  many  points  of  coincidence  with 
Hippolytus.  Clement  and  Hi23polytus  are  both  accurate 
writers,  and  it  is  impossible  lightly  to  disregard  their  tes- 
timony. We  therefore  follow  Dr.  Hort  in  accepting  the 
portion  of  Hippolytus  (Bk.  vii.  ch.  20-27)  as  an  imperfect, 
but  so  far  as  it  goes  tolerably  correct,  reproduction  of  the 
speculations  of  the  Exegetica}  We  use  this  guarded  language 
owing  to  the  extreme  difficulty  of  apprehending  the  subtle 
ontology  of  Basilides. 


His  Philosophy. 

This  commences  with  an  affirmation,  arrived  at  by  so 
thoroughgoing  a  process  of  abstraction  as  to  be  indistin- 
guishable from  pure  negation.  The  Supreme  Fountain  of 
all  that  exists  is  conceived  of  as  the  non-existent  God,^  all 
positive  predicates  being  withdrawn  from  the  conception. 
This  Deity,  wholly  inconceivable  to  us,  and  apparently  to 
Himself,  willed  (if  such  a  term  can  be  used)  to  create  a  not- 
being  world  out  of  not-being  things.  This  archetypal  world 
was  a  kind  of  germ-potency,  containing  within  it  the  seed-mass 
of  the  existing  world,  the  origin  of  all  subsequent  growths. 
Basilides  does  not  allow  of  an  antecedent  existing  matter. 
He  recognises  the  words  of  Genesis,  "  God  said.  Let  there 
be  light,  and  there  was  light,"  to  be  the  nearest  approach  that 
human  language  can  make  to  the  hidden  truth. 

He  conceives  that  this  original  seed  had  within  it  a 
tripartite  principle  of  development,  to  which,  in  order  to  em- 
phasise its  spiritual  character,  he  gives  the  name  of  sonship. 

^  Abridged  from  Dr.  Hort's  article  in  Smith's  Dictionary. 

^  Perhaps  more  correctly  '^non-existent  god."  ovk  &v  debs  (without  the 
article).  Compare  Hegel's  dictum,  "Pure  Being  is  Pure  Nothing."  Others 
have  connected  this  conception  of  his  with  the  Aristotelian  theory  of 
Si^j/a/uij  and  iv^pyeia—qs.  a  potentially-existent  Being. 


BASILIDES  AND  THE   PSEUDO-BASILIDEANS.      201 

Part  of  this  was  subtile  or  pure,  part  coarse,  and  part 
such  as  to  be  capable  of  purification.  The  subtile  sonship 
mounted  aloft  till  it  reached  the  supreme  God ;  the  coarse 
sonship  raised  itself  to  a  certain  degree  of  nearness  to  God 
by  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who,  when  unable  to  carry  his 
companion  further,  remained  as  a  kind  of  limiting  firmament 
between  the  supramundane  sphere  and  the  world.^  The 
third  sonship  still  continued  within  the  seed-mass,  out  of 
which  burst  a  Being  called  the  Great  Archon,-  who  raised 
himself  as  far  as  the  firmament,  supposing  it  to  be  the  highest 
heaven,  where  he  fixed  his  seat,  and  became  superior  to  all 
things  except  the  third  sonship,  which,  though  he  knew  it 
not,  was  in  reality  better  than  himself.  He  then  turned  to 
create  the  world,  but  before  doing  so,  begat  out  of  the  things 
below  a  Son,  wiser  and  better  than  himself,  whom,  in  admira- 
tion of  his  excellence,  he  placed  at  his  own  right  hand.  This 
is  the  Ogdoad.  Then  the  Great  Archon,  inspired  by  his  Son, 
proceeded  with  the  heavenly  creation  as  far  as  the  moon. 
At  this  stage  another  Archon  arose  out  of  the  seed-mass, 
inferior  to  the  first  Archon,  but  superior  to  all  things  else, 
with  the  exception  of  the  third  sonship.  He  also  made  to 
himself  a  Son  wiser  than  himself,  and  he  became  the  creator 
and  governor  of  the  aerial  world.  This  region  is  called  the 
Hebdomad.  Meanwhile,  in  the  heap  and  seed-mass,  consti- 
tuting the  terrestrial  stage,  the  realm  of  natural  causation 
comes  into  being,  "  according  to  the  preordained  utterance  of 
the  Ineffable ;  and  this  has  no  ruler  over  it,  since  the  scheme 
which  the  not-being  One  planned  when  he  was  forming  all 
things  is  sufficient  for  its  guidance."  '^ 

After  the  completion  of  the  mundane  and  supramundane 
regions  there  still  remained  to  be  developed  the  third  sonship, 
which  was  revealed  in  those  souls  that  are  naturally  spiritual, 

1  This  idea  of  a  "  Limitary  Spirit "  is  thought  to  be  taken  from  the 
Horus  of  Valentinus.  It  may  also  be  partly  borrowed  from  the  notices  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  and  the  firmament  in  Genesis,  ch.  i.  3. 

-  I.e.,  Euler.     The  idea  is  perhaps  that  of  an  Angel. 

^  I.e.,  there  is  no  personal  superintendent  to  interfere  in  its  working, 
but  natural  causation  proceeds  by  fixed  laws  in  accordance  with  the 
original  creative  impulse. 


202  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

and  are  left  on  earth  to  order,  to  guide,  and  to  bring  to 
perfection  the  souls  whose  nature  it  is  to  remain  in  the  ter- 
restrial stage.  Historically,  the  period  from  Adam  to  Moses 
represents  the  reign  of  the  Great  Archon,  who  is  unname- 
able  by  man,  and  therefore  only  revealed  under  the  general 
title  of  God  Almighty.  With  Moses  the  Archon  of  the 
Hebdomad  entered  upon  the  scene,  who  revealed  himself  to 
Moses  by  the  name  of  Jehovah,  and  also  spoke  through  the 
prophets.  But  when  at  last  the  entire  creation  was  anxiously 
looking  for  the  revelation  of  the  sons  of  God,  and  the  Gospel 
was  ready  to  appear,  the  thoughts  of  the  sonship  penetrated 
beyond  the  Hebdomad  to  the  Son  of  the  Great  Archon,  who 
instructed  his  Father  as  to  their  immense  significance.  Then 
for  the  first  time  the  Great  Archon,  smitten  with  sudden 
enlightenment,  realised  that  he  was  not  the  God  of  the  whole 
universe;  he  acknowledged  a  superior  Deity,  confessed  his 
own  ignorance,  and  experienced  that  fear  of  the  Lord  which 
is  the  beginning  of  wisdom.  This  same  wisdom  was  next 
transferred  to  the  Hebdomad ;  and  from  thence  it  came  down 
and  lighted  upon  Jesus,  son  of  Mary,  not  at  His  baptism  as 
most  Gnostics  held,  but  at  the  Annunciation,  i.e.,  the  moment 
of  conception. 

From  the  time  of  the  Nativity  onward  the  world  continues 
much  as  it  is  now,  and  will  do  so  until  all  the  sonship  that 
has  been  left  behind  follows  Jesus  and  is  purified  and 
becomes  subtile,  so  that  it  can  mount  of  itself  upward  like 
the  first  sonship.  "  AVhen  every  sonship  shall  have  arrived 
above  the  Limitary  Spirit,  then  the  creation  shall  find  mercy, 
which  now  groans  and  is  tormented  and  awaits  the  revelation 
of  the  sons  of  God,  that  all  the  men  of  the  sonship  may 
ascend  up  from  hence." 

When  this  has  come  to  pass,  God  will  bring  upon  the  whole 
world  the  Great  Ignorance,  that  everything  may  remain  in 
the  stage  of  its  appointed  development,  and  may  neither 
know  nor  desire  anything  beyond  it.  This  idea  recalls  that 
of  the  River  of  Lethe,  which  is  an  integral  part  of  the 
Platonic  system.  Its  function,  however,  is  different ;  for 
whereas  Lethe  throws  oblivion  over  the  past  to  prepare  each 


BASILIDES  AND  THE   PSEUDO-BASILIDEANS.      203 

life  for  a  fresh  start  on  the  path  of  transmigration,  the  Great 
Ignorance  rivets  the  soul's  hold  on  the  particular  form  of 
life  which  is  assigned  to  it.  This  ignorance  will  extend  to 
the  Hebdomad  and  to  the  Ogdoad.  ''  And  in  this  wise  shall 
be  the  restoratiou,  all  things  according  to  nature  having  been 
founded  in  the  seed  of  the  universe  in  the  beginning,  and 
being  restored  in  their  due  seasons."  The  birth  of  Jesus  is 
considered  by  Basilides  to  be  the  first  process  of  sifting  things 
hitherto  confused,  through  the  division  between  his  own 
bodily  and  psychical  parts :  for  the  former  alone  suffered, 
and  so  were  restored  to  formlessness ;  the  latter  rose  above 
the  world,  re-entered  the  Hebdomad,  and  finally  bore  aloft 
the  third  sonship  by  purifying  it,  and  raised  it  above  the 
Limitary  Spirit  to  the  realms  of  the  first  or  blessed  sonship. 

Ethical  Side  of  his  Doctrine. 

We  gather  this  from  Clement's  criticisms.  They  are 
directed  sometimes  against  Basilides,  sometimes  against 
the  Basilideans,  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  any  distinction 
of  doctrine  is  intended  to  be  made  between  them.  In  the 
ethics  of  Basilides,  faith  ]3layed  a  highly  important  part, 
being  praised  in  lofty  and  enthusiastic  terms.  But  since  in 
his  view  faith  was  the  work  of  nature,  not  of  res23onsible 
choice,  it  cannot  be  identified  with  the  faith  of  Christians. 
Indeed,  he  pushed  this  view  of  election  so  far  as  to  sever  a 
portion  of  mankind  from  the  rest  as  alone  entitled  to  receive 
faith,  or  the  higher  enlightenment.  This  same  conception  of 
congenital  inability  to  accept  beliefs  which  transcend  the 
fixed  stage  of  the  soul's  development,  led  Basilides  to  confine 
the  remission  of  sins  to  those  sins  which  were  committed 
involuntarily  and  through  ignorance.  This  part  of  his  theory 
is  involved  in  much  obscurity ;  for  whereas  Origen  declares 
that  he  depreciated  martyrdom  and  spoke  lightly  of  the  sin 
of  sacrificing  to  idols,  Clement  accuses  him  of  treating  all 
suffering  as  a  punishment  for  past  sin,  that  of  the  martyr 
included ;  a  principle  which  Basilides,  when  pressed,  ex- 
tended, though  with  great  apparent  hesitation,  even  to  the 


204  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

h  11  man  Christ.  He  also  entertained  the  conception  of  sin 
in  a  prior  state  (even  a  non-human  one)  as  working  out  its 
appointed  penalty  of  suffering  here,  the  elect  souls  suffering 
honourably  through  martyrdom,  and  those  of  a  less  noble 
sort  being  purged  by  their  appropriate  chastisement. 

Discipline  and  Worship. 

In  these  departments  we  hear  of  few  changes  introduced 
by  Basilides.  Clement  mentions  his  practice  of  celebrating 
the  eve  of  Christ's  Baptism  by  a  watch-night  service.  Accord- 
ing to  Agrippa,  he  followed  the  Pythagorean  fashion  of  pre- 
scribing a  five  years'  silence  to  his  disciples.  Agrippa  is  also 
an  authority  for  the  statement  that  he  enforced  his  views  by 
quotations  from  two  prophets,  Barcabbas  and  Bar-coph,  and 
other  fictitious  authorities,  bestowing  barbarous  appellations 
on  them  to  strike  the  vulgar  with  amazement.  These  alleged 
prophecies,  which  we  need  not  accuse  Basilides  of  fabricat- 
ing, were  doubtless  current  among  Gnostics  and  Manicheans, 
and  were  drawn  from  the  apocryphal  Zoroastrian  literature. 
Isidore,  the  son  and  discij^le  of  Basilides,  declared  the  theolo- 
gical allegories  of  Pherecydes  to  have  been  taken  from  the 
prophecy  of  Ham.  Now  there  was  a  tradition  that  Mizraim, 
the  reputed  progenitor  of  the  Egyptians,  Babylonians  and 
Persians,  was  identical  with  Zoroaster,  and  that  he  was 
taught  the  arts  of  magic  by  his  father  Ham.  Hippolytus, 
however,  says  nothing  of  these  apocryphal  prophecies;  but 
speaks  of  the  sect  of  Basilides,  boasting  that  they  took  to 
themselves  the  glory  of  Matthias,  by  which  he  probably 
means  that  they  borrowed  doctrines  from  a  work  entitled  the 
Traditions  of  Mcdthias. 

General  Characteristics. 

To  sum  up  the  general  characteristics  of  his  theory,  we 
may  say  that  he  was  influenced  in  varying  degrees  by 
Orientalism,  Greek  philosophy,^  and  Christian  doctrine.     It 

^  The  influence  of  Aristotle  is  traceable  in  the  softening  of  antitheses, 
and  in  the  assignment  of  regular  causation  to  the  realm  of  (pvcn^. 


BASILIDES  AND  THE   PSEUDO-BASILIDEANS.      205 

is  uQcertain  whether  he  was,  as  is  usually  assumed,  anterior 
to  Valentinus,  or,  as  is  more  likely,  contemporary  with  him, 
and  subjected  to  his  influence,  though  rather  by  way  of 
repulsion  than  of  attraction.  He  reveals  a  decided  tendency 
to  soften  those  oppositions  which  Gnosticism  delights  inj  as 
matter  and  spirit,  Jewish  and  Christian,  creation  and  redemp- 
tion. He  was  careful  to  preserve  in  theory  the  original  one- 
ness of  the  Deity ;  yet  he  ascribed  the  chaotic  nothingness 
out  of  which  the  universe  was  to  spring  to  Him  who  was  its 
Maker  and  source.  Notwithstanding  this,  however,  Creator 
and  creation  were  not  confused  by  him,  but  melt  away  to- 
gether in  a  vista  of  obscure  thought.  In  his  ethical  system, 
though  faith  was  allowed  its  right  of  pre-eminence,  yet  it 
was  conceived  as  an  energy  of  the  understanding,  confined 
to  those  who  had  the  requisite  inborn  capacity,  while  the 
dealings  of  God  with  man  were  shut  up  within  the  limits 
of  a  mechanical  justice. 

He  seems  to  have  been  a  solitary  thinker  with  no  disciple 
of  any  eminence  except  his  son  Isidore,  who  is  alluded  to  in 
this  connection  by  Hippolytus  and  Clement.  Isidore  wrote 
a  treatise  called  '^Expositions  of  the  Prophet  Farchor'^  in 
which  he  put  forward  the  plea  that  the  higher  thoughts  of 
Pagan  philosophers  and  mythologers  were  derived  from  a 
Jewish  source.  Clement  also  mentions  a  treatise  by  him 
On  Adherent  Sonl}  which  took  up  a  position  somewhat 
antagonistic  to  that  of  his  father  with  regard  to  the  connec- 
tion of  the  passions  with  the  soul.  Basilides  had  regarded 
them  as  "appendages,"  and  so  had  excused  their  aberra- 
tions ;  but  Isidore  contends  for  the  unity  of  the  soul,  and 
the  necessity  of  overcoming,  through  the  reasoning  faculty, 
the  inferior  creation  within  us.  Though  the  fame  of  Basilides 
was  so  great,  and  his  name  is  familiar  as  an  eponym  of  heresy, 
yet  his  original  teaching  lacked  the  elements  of  vitality.  It 
was  a  system  of  lofty  siDCCulation,  obscure  and  difficult  to 
grasp.  Moreover,  in  some  points  it  lent  itself  to  serious  mis- 
interpretation.    His  imposition  of  a  five  years'  silence  seemed 

1  -Kepi  irpoa^vovs  <pvxv^-     The  passions  seem  to  have  been  considered  as 
sprouting  out  of  the  soul,  as  the  young  zoophyte  sprouts  from  its  parent. 


2o6  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

to  countenance  the  existence  of  a  secret  and  presumably  im- 
moral esoteric  teaching;  his  doctrine  of  election  admitted 
of  an  Antinomian  construction.  On  the  whole,  while  with 
Mansel  admitting  a  Platonic,  and  also  a  considerable  Stoic 
leaven  in  his  system, ^  we  are  compelled  to  recognise  a  no  less 
considerable  admixture  of  genuine  Christian  elements,  which 
entitle  him  to  be  classed  among  those  Gnostics  who  are  less 
widely  removed  from  the  Christian  faith.  The  school  of 
spurious  Basilideans  who  at  a  later  epoch  professed  to  follow 
his  views  in  reality  misrepresented  them  in  every  essential 
particular,  and  he  must  in  no  respect  be  held  responsible 
for  the  excesses  either  of  doctrine  or  practice  by  which  they 
became  justly  infamous. 

The  Pseudo-Basilideans. 

For  this  school  our  ultimate  authorities  are  Irenseus  and 
the  lost  Compendium  of  Ilippolytus,  both  interwoven  into 
the  account  of  E23iphanius,  and  perhaps  employed  by  the 
Pseudo-Tertullian.  Its  theology  was  founded  on  the  notion 
of  a  supreme  Deity,  from  whom  were  descended  various 
personified  attributes  in  lineal  succession,  who  constituted 
the  First  or  Highest  Heaven.  In  all  they  reckoned  no  less 
than  365  heavens  and  365  sets  of  angels,  by  the  lowest  of 
whom  our  world  and  man  were  made.  Their  Archon  was  the 
God  of  the  Jews,  who  provoked  such  discord  among  angels 
and  men  that  the  Supreme  Father  sent  down  Xous  (Mind),  his 
Firstborn,  who  is  also  Christ,  to  redeem  the  world.  Christ 
appeared  on  earth,  but  only  in  outward  phantasm,  and  did 
not  really  take  flesh.  It  was  Simon  the  Cyrenian  who  was 
crucified ;  for  Jesus  exchanged  forms  with  him  as  he  bore 
His  cross  on  the  way  to  Calvary.  The  supreme  power  and 
source  of  all  being  is  called  Abraxas  or  Abrasax,  a  Greek 
word,  the  letters  of  which  make  up  the  numerical  total  of 
365.  But  this  imaginary  being  must  not  be  confounded 
with  the  unnamed  supreme  Deity. 

1  He  also  shows  distinct  traces  of  the  influence  of  Aristotle,  especially 
in  the  pure  intellectualism  of  his  ideal. 


BASILIDES  AND  THE  PSEUDO-BASILIDEANS.      207 

In  their  moral  theory  these  Pseudo-Basilideans  denied  the 
value  of  martyrdom,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  casting  pearls 
before  swine  and  throwing  children's  meat  to  the  dogs. 
They  considered  themselves  to  be  no  longer  Jews,  and  in 
the  ordinary  sense  no  longer  Christians,  though  in  a  higher 
sense  more  than  Christians,  i.e.,  in  their  spiritual  enlighten- 
ment and  in  their  freedom  to  indulge  in  moral  laxity.  Clement 
complains  of  their  degeneracy  from  the  high  standard  of 
conduct  maintained  by  Basilides  himself,  and  there  seems  no 
reason  to  doubt  that  a  licentious  and  impure  life  was  among 
their  most  prominent  characteristics. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

FIRST  DIVISION  CONTINUED  .—  VALENTINUS  AND 
THE   VALENTINIANS. 

If  Basilides  was  content  to  indoctrinate  a  small  circle  of 
philosophic  adherents,  the  brilliant  theosophist  Valentinus 
attempted  nothing  less  than  to  thrust  his  interpretation  of 
Christianity  npon  the  entire  Christian  world.  In  influence 
second  only  to  Marcion,  if  second  even  to  him,  his  extra- 
ordinary popularity  aroused  the  defensive  strength  of  ortho- 
doxy to  its  most  determined  efforts,  and  called  into  existence 
an  armoury  of  aggressive  warfare,  keen,  trenchant  and  effec- 
tive, but  of  which  the  forging  lacked  the  true  Christian 
temper.  In  estimating  the  character  of  the  Gnostic  teachers, 
we  must  make  some  allowance  for  the  natural  exasperation 
of  their  orthodox  opponents.  But,  nevertheless,  there  seems 
sufiicient  reason  to  believe  that  they  added  to  brilliancy  of 
doctrine  and  the  resources  of  a  profound  erudition  an  element 
of  thaumaturgic  imposture,  and  often  the  seductions  of  a  not 
too  scrupulous  gallantry.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  the 
eyes  of  a  vast  multitude  they  represented  the  main  stream  of 
Christianity.  The  attractive  glitter  of  their  theories  eclipsed 
the  sober  doctrines  of  the  Church,  and  we  cannot  wonder  if 
it  provoked  a  harsh  and  often  unjust  method  of  refutation. 
In  Valentinus  all  the  fascinations  of  the  Gnostic  reached 
their  highest  point.  It  was  opposition  to  his  influence 
that  roused  the  calm  spirit  of  Irenaeus  into  unwonted  indig- 
nation, and  drove  him  to  arm  himself  with  the  uncongenial 
weapon  of  an  awkward  pleasantry.  But  to  this  opposition 
we  owe  these  concentrated  efforts  to  expound  the  whole 
Christian  system   on   which  the  great   edifice   of  dogmatic 

theology  was  ultimately  reared.     If  the  battle  had  not  been 

^  208 


VALENTINUS  AND   THE  VALENTINIANS.         209 

fought  out  between  Valentinism  and  Christianity,  first  by 
Iren^eiis  and  then  by  Tertullian,  with  a  prolixity  wearisome 
perhaps,  but  admirable  in  its  searching  thoroughness,  we  may 
be  sure  that  the  task  of  Athanasius  in  the  succeeding  age 
would  have  been  far  more  difficult,  nay,  humanly  speaking, 
impossible. 

Having  regard  therefore  to  the  extreme  importance  of  this 
prince  of  heresy  in  the  dialectical  evolution  of  the  Church's 
doctrine  and  philosophy,  we  shall  make  no  apology  for  treat- 
ing his  views  at  greater  length  than  their  intrinsic  worth - 
lessness  demands.  In  him  we  see  the  most  comprehensive 
attempt  to  fuse  Christianity  into  the  vast  fabric  of  religious 
speculation  erected  by  the  various  schools  of  Pagan  thought, 
and  while  recognising  its  supreme  value,  to  deprive  it 
nevertheless  of  its  essential  foundation,  and  virtually  to 
destroy  it  altogether.  Some  critics  have  represented  the 
system  of  Valentinus  as  a  Philosophy  of  Religion,  analogous 
to  that  Science  of  Religions  with  which  Professor  Max 
Mliller  has  made  the  English  world  familiar.  But  this 
view,  though  partially  true,  is  not  an  adequate  account  of  it. 
Valentinus  was  not  a  philosopher:  if  anything,  he  may  be 
called  a  theosophist.  He  did  not  maintain  the  genuine 
critical  attitude,  external  to  all  religions,  while  sympathising 
with  all.  Neither  the  temper  of  the  age  nor  the  character  of 
the  man  was  adapted  to  such  a  position.  He  rather  aspired  to 
include  revelation  within  his  spiritual  purview  as  an  integral 
element,  but  he  based  his  acceptance  of  it  not  on  the  prin- 
ciple of  faith  acting  in  accordance  with  the  higher  reason,  but 
on  a  natural  affinity  of  spiritual  perception,  which  enabled 
him  at  once  to  accept,  and  by  interpreting  to  transcend  it. 

The  following  sketch  is  founded  mainly  on  the  views  of 
Neander,  though  with  additions  from  other  sources  rendered 
necessary  by  the  progress  of  scholarship. 

His  Life. 

The  country  and  origin  of  Valentinus  are  doubtful.  Iren- 
aeus,  who  treats  his  opinions  fully,  is  silent  on  both  these 

0 


2  10  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

points.  Epiphanius  mentions  a  tradition  that  he  belonged  to 
the  Phrehonite  Nome,  a  word  nowhere  else  found,  but  which 
may  be  a  corruption  of  Phthcnotite  or  Ptenetite,  a  Kome  or 
District  in  the  Delta  mentioned  by  Pliny.  He  was  certainly 
educated  at  Alexandria.  Jerome  speaks  of  him  as  a  learned 
man,  Origen  as  "'no  ordinary  person."  Tertullian  says  he 
was  a  student  of  Plato,  and  this  is  highly  probable.  It  is 
also  likely  that  he  was  acquainted  with  the  Philonic  philo- 
sophy. Clement  says  his  disciples  boasted  that  he  had  been 
taught  by  Theudades,  a  disciple  of  S.  Paul. 

As  to  his  date,  we  are  told  by  Tertullian  that  he  lived 
until  the  pontificate  of  Eleutherus,  A.D.  177.  Iren^eus  1  says 
"he  flourished  under  Pius,  and  remained  until  Anicetus." 
Eusebius '^  in  the  Chronicon  for  the  year  141  says,  "Under 
Hyginus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  Valentinus  the  founder  of  a 
special  heresy  was  acknowledged  at  Rome."  In  another 
place  ^  he  speaks  of  his  heresy  being  recognised  under  Pius. 
It  is  most  likely  that  he  passed  as  a  Catholic  for  some  years, 
and  did  not  reveal  his  heretical  tendencies,  in  Rome  at  any 
rate,  before  the  ]3ontificate  of  Pius.  Driven  from  the  Roman 
Church,  he  fled  to  Cyprus,  where  he  probably  elaborated  his 
remarkable  system,  and  where  he  must  have  died.*  It  is 
best  to  accept  the  statement  of  Iren^ens  in  preference  to 
that  of  Tertullian,  and  to  suppose  that  he  did  not  survive 
the  pontificate  of  Anicetus.  It  is  possible  that  earlier  in 
his  life  he  began  the  dissemination  of  his  views  in  Egypt. 
Certain  it  is  that  by  the  time  of  Justin  his  doctrines  were 
well  known  in  the  East:  for  in  the  dialogue  with  Trypho, 
professed  to  be  held  at  Ephesus  (before  a.d.  150),  he  is 
already  mentioned  as  giving  his  name  to  a  sect.  Moreover,  in 
Justin's  work  on  heretics  published  before  his  first  Apology 
(A.D.  145)  Valentinus  was  attacked.  We  may  therefore  fairly 
conclude  that  his  heresy  began  as  far  back  as  the  closing 
years  of  Hadrian  (died  A.D.  138),  so  that  sujoposing  Valen- 
tinus to  have  died  about  A.D.  158  at  the  age  of  y^i,,  his  birth 
might  have  taken  place  as  early  as   85  (in  which  case  he 

1  I.  xi.  -  Chron.  Anton.  Pii.  III.  ^  Anton.  Pii.  F/..  i.e.,  a.d.  144. 

•*  Xcander  tliiiiks  that  he  spent  the  last  years  of  his  life  at  Rome. 


VALENTINUS  AND  THE  VALENTINIANS.         211 

may  have  seen  Ignatius)  ;  though  it  is  better  to  put  it  a 
little  later. 

His  writings  comprised  Letters  and  Homilies.  Pseudo- 
Origen,  in  the  Dialogue  against  the  Marcionites,  mentions  a 
treatise  of  his  on  the  origin  of  evil.  Tertullian  does  not 
accuse  him  of  tampering  with  the  canon,  but  only  of  wrongly 
interpreting  it.  His  disciples  wrote  a  new  Gospel.  A  frag- 
ment is  found  in  Epiphanius,^  which  some  have  attributed  to 
Valentinus,  but  it  belongs  to  one  of  his  disciples. 

His  System— Theolog-y. 

In  giving  a  sketch  of  his  system,  we  must  premise  that  it 
is  far  from  easy  to  distinguish  between  his  doctrines  and 
those  of  his  followers ;  but  as  their  general  tendency  is  the 
same,  this  is  of  no  great  importance. 

In  the  first  place,  he  assigns  a  tri-partite  character  to  the 
Universe  of  Being.  It  consists  of  three  spheres — the  Pleroma 
or  Divine  Sphere,  the  realm  outside  the  Pleroma,  and  our 
mundane  world.  The  primal  essence  and  root-principle  of  the 
whole  is  an  illimitable  and  incomprehensible  Being  whom  he 
calls  Bythos  {i.e.,  de23th),  a  word  employed  in  preference  to 
God,  because,  without  any  theological  implication,  it  suggests 
at  once  the  attributes  of  incognisability  and  fecundity  of  life. 

From  Bythos,  as  the  fountain-source,  a  succession  of 
spiritual  powers  were  thrown  off  by  a  process  of  pullulation 
or  emanation  (Trpo^oXrJ),  analogous  apparently  to  that  by 
which  the  zoophyte  (hydra)  multiplies  its  individuality.  The 
distinctive  term  foi'  these  spiritual  joowers  is  JEon  (alcov),  a 
word  which,  among  Gnostic  thinkers,  has  three  grades  of 
meaning — (i)  its  original  sense  of  eternity;  (2)  the  primary 
divine  Powers  or  personified  attributes  ;  (3)  the  whole  emana- 
tion-world as  contrasted  with  the  whole  world  outside  the 
Pleroma. 

In  this  supernal  process  of  self-development  the  jDowers 
that  successively  appeared  stood  as  complementary  one  to 
another,  in   pairs   or  Syzygics  {av^vjLat),  one  male  and  one 

M  5- 


212  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

female.  Of  this  mystic  sexual  distinction  a  symbol  or 
copy  may  be  traced  more  or  less  clearly  in  every  sphere  of 
existence.  And  not  only  so,  but  the  entire  series  of  ^ons 
as  a  whole,  which  is  called  the  Pleroma,  or  fulness  of  God- 
head, is  itself  conceived  of  as  female  in  relation  to  Bythos, 
and  called  Ennoia,  Rejiection,  and  sometimes  Sige  and  Charis, 
Silence  and  Beauty.  This  primeval  pair  generates  a  second 
pair,  Nous  or  Mind,  and  Aletheia  or  Truth,  and  these  four 
form  the  first  Tetrad.  The  second  Tetrad  follows,  consisting 
of  Logos  {Reason)  and  Zoe  {Life),  who  in  their  turn  produce 
Anthropos  {Man)  and  Ecclesia  {Church),  by  which  we  are 
to  understand  not  earthly  humanity  and  the  earthly  church, 
but  the  archetypal  humanity  and  the  pre-existent  church  of 
the  celestial  sphere.  These  eight  aeons  complete  the  Ogdoad, 
a  name  which  appears  frequently  in  the  Valentinian  contro- 
versy. After  this  there  is  a  double  line  of  generations,  partly 
from  Logos  and  partly  from  Anthropos  and  Ecclesia.  From 
Logos  as  a  root  comes  the  Decad,  also  in  syzygies  or  pairs, 
Ageiatos  {the  Ageless),  and  ^em)?>\^  {Unification) ;  Autophyes 
{the  Self-produced)  and  Hedone  {Pleasure) ;  Akinetos  {the 
Unmoved)  and  Syncrasis  {Intermixture);  Monogenes  {Only- 
Begotten)  and  Macaria  {Blessed) ;  Bythius  {the  A  hysnial) 
and  Mixis  {Conjugal  union).  From  Anthropos  and  Ecclesia 
is  derived  the  Dodecad,  consisting  of  six  pairs,  viz.,  Para- 
cletus  {the  Paraclete)  and  Pistis  {Faith) ;  Patrikos  {the  Pater- 
nal) and  Elpis  {Ho^e) ;  Metrikos  {the  Measurer)  and  Agape 
{Love) ;  Ainos  {Praise)  and  Synesis  {Appreciation) ;  Eccle- 
siasticus  {Preacher)  and  Macariotes  {Happiness  ?) ;  Theletos 
(  Willing)  and  Sophia  (  Wisdom).  These  complete  the  Triakad 
or  group  of  thirty  divine  powers  which  make  up  the  Pleroma. 
Of  these  Nous  alone  was  sufBciently  pure  of  essence  to  be 
able  to  apprehend  Bythos.  Sophia,  the  last  of  the  seons, 
had  an  uncontrollable  desire  to  do  so,  but,  being  conscious  of 
her  inability,  was  fain  to  pine  away  and  melt  into  infinitude, 
when  in  her  wanderings  she  met  with  Horus  {Limit),  a  solitary 
Virtue,  who  succeeded  in  assuaging  her  madness.  She  was 
prematurely  delivered  of  a  shapeless  birth  called  Enthymesis 
or    Thought,   who,    immediately  on  entering  into  existence, 


VALENTINUS  AND  THE  VALENTINIANS.         213 

was  excluded  from  the  Pleroma  and  sought  a  refuge  in  the 
terrestrial  world. 

In  order  to  ^^revent  any  recurrence  of  such  misadventures, 
Bythos  caused  to  be  put  forth  two  fresh  seons,  Christus  and 
Spiritus  Sanctus  {Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit),  who  should 
liave  the  power  of  revealing  to  the  aeons  the  ineffable  nature 
of  Bythos.  Strictly  speaking,  even  these  favoured  geons  can 
neither  know  nor  explain  it,  but  they  can  discern  it  in  its 
self-manifestation  as  displayed  in  the  development  of  the 
aeons,  and  this  is  what  luc  mean  by  knowledge  of  the  Divine. 
Bythos,  by  his  self-limitation,  is  the  cause  of  existence  ;  were 
this  limitation  removed,  existence  would  be  annihilated.  This 
is  why  Horus,  the  Genius  of  Limitation  and  the  condition  of 
all  existence,  must  be  placed  outside  the  Pleroma,  for  he 
fixes  and  guards  the  spiritual  existences  within  the  Pleroma 
as  well  as  the  inferior  ones  of  this  lower  world.  In  every 
act  of  producing  phenomenal  existence  two  separate  functions 
are  attributed  to  Horus  ;  one  by  which  he  purifies  the  original 
spiritual  individuality  from  those  foreign  elements  which  must 
necessarily  enter  into  it,  and  into  which,  unless  purified,  it 
threatens  to  lapse  ;  and  one  by  which  he  establishes  the  indi- 
viduality, when  thus  purified,  in  that  particular  form  of  equili- 
brium which  is  to  be  its  proper  nature.  Valentinus  found 
signs  and  types  of  this  mysterious  process  in  the  natural  world, 
and  also  in  the  words  of  Scripture.  For  instance,  when 
John  the  Ba23tist  announced  that  Christ's  fan  was  in  his 
hand,  and  that  He  would  burn  up  the  chaff  with  fire  un- 
quenchable, this  was  interpreted  to  imply  the  double  activity 
by  which  Horus  would  destroy  the  vitiated  elements  (matter) 
of  the  world  and  purify  the  redeemed.  Again,  in  Christ's 
recommendation  to  take  up  the  cross  and  follow  Him,  he  saw 
a  description  of  that  Divine  Potency,  symbolised  by  the 
heavenly  Stauros,  and  on  earth  by  the  crucifixion  of  Jesus, 
whereby  each  individual,  being  purified  from  all  that  is  foreign 
to  his  nature,  and  thus  attaining  to  self-conscious  realisation 
of  his  higher  life,  first  becomes  a  true  disciple  of  Christ, 
capable  of  identification  with  Him. 

The  contact  of  the  Pleroma  with  the  world  is  originally 


214  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

indirect.  Though  there  is  on  earth  a  certain  manifestation  of 
Divine  Wisdom,  it  is  not  the  ^on  Sophia,  but  her  immature 
birth,  Enthymesis,  which  comes  into  the  material  world,  and 
there  only  gradually  attains  to  maturity.  By  the  appear- 
ance of  Christ  and  His  redemption,  Enthymesis  (or  Thought) 
was  matured.  And  it  is  onl}'  when  the  development  of  the 
world  is  summed  up  and,  so  to  speak,  read  backwards  by  the 
light  of  Christ's  Kedemption,  that  it  presents  the  spectacle 
of  Divine  wisdom  at  work,  and  satisfies  the  cravings  of 
thought.  In  this  way  the  heavenly  Sophia  is  spoken  of  as 
rejoicing  to  recover  her  lost  offspring ;  for  now  for  the  first 
time  the  manifestation  corresponds  to  the  idea,  and  the  idea 
presents  itself  to  immediate  intuition  through  its  manifesta- 
tion in  the  finite. 

Thus  we  can  understand  the  A'alentinian  distinction  be- 
tween a  Higher  Wisdom  and  a  Lower.  The  latter,  which  he 
calls  Achamoth,  is  identical  with  the  Mundane  Soul,  from 
whose  mingling  with  matter  springs  all  living  existence  in 
its  three  gradations.     These  gradations  are  as  follows : — 

(i.)  The  spiritual  natures,  endowed  with  di\^ne  germs  of 
life,  akin  to  Sophia,  and  also  to  the  Pleroma. 

(2.)  The  psychical  natures,  separated  from  the  former  by 
an  appreciable  admixture  of  matter — these  would  be  repre- 
sented by  ordinary  moral  people. 

(3.)  The  ungodlike  natures,  immersed  in  matter,  whose 
tendency  is  to  disruption  and  dissolution. 

We  now  come  to  an  important  and  difficult  part  of  his 
theory.  He  reasons  thus.  Since  every  process  of  develop- 
ment ultimately  leads  back  to  Bythos,  who  (it  may  be  re- 
membered), tliough  the  source  of  all  being,  cannot  come  into 
contact  with  matter,  a  t}q3e  or  analogue  of  the  Bythos  must 
be  imagined,  who  should  stand  in  a  similar  relation  to  the 
material  world  in  which  Bythos  stands  to  the  Pleroma,  only 
that  he  must  act  involuntarily  as  the  unconscious  instrument 
of  Bythos  in  perfecting  actual  existence. 

This  Being  is  the  Demiurge  or  AVorld-God,  a  In^brid  con- 
ception common  to  almost  all  Gnostics,  partly  derived  from 
a    false    construction    of    Plato's    hypothesis    given    in    the 


VALENTINUS  AND  THE  VALENTINIANS.  215 

Timaeus,^  and  partly  borrowed  from  a  warped  and  shallow 
estimate  of  the  character  of  Jehovah  as  revealed  in  the  Old 
Testament.  The  Demiurge's  character  is  variously  repre 
sented  according  to  the  different  sects.  To  A'alentinus  he 
appeared  as  a  just  and  holy  Power,  inferior  in  intelligence 
to  members  of  the  Pleroma,  and  therefore  deficient  in  the 
loftiest  spiritual  goodness,  but  nevertheless  having  within 
him  some  traces  of  it.  These  he  is  able  to  impart  to  the 
spiritual  natures  among  men,  giving  them  their  essential 
character  of  unity  ;  while  to  the  psychical  natures  he  assigns 
the  quality  of  multiplicity  subordinated  to  a  higher  unity, 
which  may  be  raised  from  the  unconscious  to  the  conscious 
stage.  The  ungodlike  natures  are  under  the  guidance  of 
Satan,  and  they  are  characterised  by  negation  of  being. 
Only  the  spiritual  natures  contain  within  them  the  principle 
of  immortality ;  the  psychical  either  gain  immortality  or  fail 
of  it,  according  as  they  yield  their  will  to  the  godlike  or  the 
ungodlike ;  while  the  ungodlike  tend  inevitably  to  death, 
which  yet  is  not  wholly  evil,  since  it  is  the  appointed  con- 
dition of  their  being  vanquished  by  the  higher  wisdom,  and 
so  finally  saved. 

Redemption. 

This  thought  leads  us  naturally  to  Valentinus'  theory  of 
Redemption,  in  order  to  understand  which  it  is  necessary  to 
bear  in  mind  certain  points  whicli  are  implied  in  what  has 
gone  before. 

(i.)  That  a  constant  process  of  vital  development  pervades 
every  region  of  existence. 

(2.)  That  the  first  disturbance  of  the  primeval  harmony 
(by  the  ^on  Sophia)  originated  within  the  Pleroma. 

From  these  positions  it  follows  : — 

(i.)  That  Redemption  must  begin  within  the  Pleroma  by 
the  re-establishment  of  its  broken  harmony. 

^  Plato,  while  attributing  the  creation  of  the  world  to  God,  does  not 
clearly  define  His  relation  to  that  which  is  essentially  imperfect,  except 
in  so  far  as  to  deny  that  He  either  created  or  arranged  it.  See  Jowett's 
Plato,  vol.  ii.  pp.  478  sqq. 


2i6  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

(2.)  That  this  re-establishment  will  inevitably  image  itself 
forth  in  all  other  grades  of  existence,  and  among  them,  of 
course,  in  our  mundane  system. 

(3.)  That  the  same  agent  who  reveals  the  hidden  God  in 
all  the  different  spheres  must  reunite  with  Him  all  the 
alienated  modes  of  existence,  working  continually  until  the 
consummation  of  all  things. 

This  agent,  it  will  be  remembered,  is  the  ^on  Christus, 
under  whose  name,  as  well  as  those  of  Monogenes,  Logos, 
and  Soter  (Saviour),  the  idea  of  a  Redeemer  is  embodied. 
The  latter  is  the  counter|3art  of  Christus  outside  the  Pleroma, 
in  whom  the  Christus  of  the  Pleroma  reflects  himself,  and 
through  him  works  in  individual  beings  until  they  are 
perfected.  Thus  the  ^on  Christ  is  tHe  efiicient  cause  of 
Redemption ;  the  Soter  is  the  receiver  and  perfecter  of  his 
operation.  Since  the  /Eon  Christ  is  anterior  to  the  world, 
it  follows  that  RedemptioQ  in  its  earliest  stage  is  coincident 
with  creation.  The  Soter,  who  stands  in  the  same  relation 
to  Achamoth,  the  Mundane  Soul,  as  Christ  does  to  the  Holy 
Spirit,  inspires  in  her  the  Creative  Idea,  which  she  communi- 
cates to  the  Demiurge,  who  believes  himself  to  be  acting 
independently,  though  in  reality  he  is  but  an  instrument  of 
Bythos. 

In  all  this  we  see  plainly  the  influence  of  Plato's  theories. 
To  Valentinus,  as  to  Plato,  the  world  becomes  a  picture,  more 
or  less  distant,  of  the  divine  glory  ;  but  it  is  only  the  spiritual 
natures  akin  to  the  Pleroma,  as  in  Plato's  view  it  is  only 
the  philosophic  mind,  that  can  discern  in  external  things  the 
reflection  of  the  unseen  glory ;  and  it  is  these  natures  alone 
who  acknowledge  the  Demiurge  to  be  a  true  prophet. 

Anthropology. 

In  close  connection  with  this  hypothesis  was  the  position 
assigned  to  man  in  the  universe.  Through  the  invisible 
revelation  of  God,  unwittingly  made  through  the  Demiurge 
in  man's  spirit,  man  was  destined  to  be  the  link  of  connection 
between  the  prototype  and  the  copy,  and  so  to  make  good 


VALENTINUS  AND   THE   VALENTINIANS.         217 

the  imperfect  testimony  of  the  world  to  its  Divine  Origin.  It 
is  for  this  reason  that  man  is  represented  as  one  of  the  aeons 
in  the  Pleroma ;  and  Irenseus  quotes  a  Valentinian  aphorism^ 
"  When  God  willed  to  make  a  revelation  of  Himself,  this  was 
called  Man." 

The  Demiurge,  in  creating  the  actual  race  of  man,  uncon- 
sciously infused  some  of  the  seed  of  the  Archetypal  Man 
into  his  nature,  so  that  man  really  transcended  the  Cosmos 
into  which  he  had  been  created,  and  of  which  the  Demiurge 
had  supposed  him  to  be  merely  the  highest  product.  But, 
on  observing  his  extra-cosmical  affinities,  the  Demiurge  was 
struck  with  awe,  and  forthwith  combined  with  the  cosmical 
powers  to  hold  man  in  subjection  by  suppressing  his  con- 
sciousness of  his  higher  affinities.  In  this,  though  he  knew 
it  not,  he  was  acting  under  the  direction  of  the  Supreme 
Deity,  since  in  no  other  way  could  the  process  of  redemption 
be  extended  to  the  whole  sphere  of  liviug  being,  and  matter 
and  death  be  destroyed. 

Consequently,  we  must  look  to  the  spiritual  natures  alone 
for  a  true  manifestation  of  humanity.  They  are  the  salt  of 
the  earth.  The  animal  soul  {"^vx^)  '^^  ^^^^  ^^^®  vehicle,  by 
which  the  spiritual  part  enters  into  the  temporal  world,  and 
develops  itself  to  maturity.  It  will  be  left  behind  so  soon 
as  the  freed  spirit  rises  to  join  its  angelic  consort  in  the 
Pleroma. 

Doctrine  of  the  Messiah. 

The  Demiurge,  it  will  be  remembered,  had  all  along  acted, 
though  unconsciously,  under  a  higher  divine  influence.  This 
he  showed  by  experiencing  a  strong  attraction  for  the  more 
spiritual  natures  among  his  chosen  people  the  Jews,  whom 
he  selected  for  his  S23ecial  favours,  making  them  prophets, 
priests  and  rulers.  These  men  were  able  to  point  onwards 
to  the  higher  order  of  things  to  be  introduced  by  the  Soter. 
This  led  Valentinus  to  form  a  theory  of  inspiration,  which, 
according  to  him,  consisted  of  two  parts,  an  influence  exer- 
cised by  the  Demiurge  upon  ordinary  minds,  and  one  exercised 
by  the  Soter  upon  the   spiritual   natures.       To  the  former 


2i8  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

category  belong  the  predictions  of  future  events  in  prophecy 
apart  from  the  perception  of  their  inner  meaning:  to  the 
latter  belong  the  higher  Messianic  aspirations  and  the  antici- 
pations of  the  Christian  dispensation.  We  discern  in  this  a 
genuine  attempt  to  reconcile  the  conflicting  interests  of  the 
religious  and  scientific  standpoints  in  the  exposition  of  Holy 
Scripture.  It  is  uncertain  whether,  in  addition  to  this, 
A^alentinus  acknowledged  any  apprehension  of  higher  truth 
among  Pagan  thinkers,  but,  on  the  whole,  it  is  probable  that 
he  did,  regarding  it  as  part  of  the  world-wide  preparation 
for  the  coming  of  the  Soter  into  the  world  in  the  form  of  a 
Jewish  Messiah. 

The  Soter,  who  had  directed  the  development  of  the  spiri- 
tual life-germs  that  fell  from  the  Pleroma  to  form  a  new 
world,  found  it  necessary  at  last  to  interfere  immediately  in 
the  mundane  course,  in  order  to  extend  the  Act  of  Redemp- 
tion, which  he  had  already  accomplished  in  his  consort 
Achamoth(the  Mundane  Soul)  to  all  the  spiritual  and  psychical 
life  that  had  emanated  from  her.  To  do  this  effectually,  he 
had  to  unite  with  a  human  soul.  The  Demiurge  had  pro- 
mised his  people  a  Messiah  who  should  liberate  them  from 
the  Hylic  power  (the  principle  of  Matter),  rule  over  all  the 
world,  and  reward  his  faithful  subjects  with  earthly  bliss. 
He  sent  down  from  heaven  this  being,  who  is  known  as  the 
Psychical  Christ.  This  Christ,  who  appeared  as  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  had  an  animal  soul,  a  spiritual  principle  dei^ived 
from  Achamoth,  and  a  body,  which  according  to  the  Italian 
or  Western  Valentinians  was  suffering,  but  according  to  the 
Eastern  school  was  wholly  ethereal  and  impassible.  Both 
schools  agreed  in  declaring  that  He  was  not  born  of  the 
Virgin  Mary's  substance,  but  conducted  through  her  womb 
as  through  a  pipe  (acoXrjv),  At  His  baptism  the  pre-existent 
Soter  descended  upon  Him,  but  together  with  the  spiritual 
principle  deserted  Him  at  His  passion,  the  animal  soul 
{yjrv')(j])  and  the  quasi-ethereal  body  alone  remaining.  These 
exhibited  on  earth  an  exact  representation  of  what  had 
happened  before  on  the  heavenly  Cross  {aravpos:).  Such 
is  the  Docetism  of  Valentinus.     The  descent  of  the  vSoter 


VALENTINUS   AND  THE  VALEXTINIANS.         219 

first  gave  Messiah  consciousness  of  the  true  nature  of  His 
kingdom,  a  sense  as  much  beyond  the  comprehension  of 
the  Demiarge  as  it  had  been  previously  beyond  His  own. 
This  iUuminating  process  of  Christ's  baptism  must  be 
repeated  in  each  soul,  in  order  that  truly  sanctifying 
effects  may  follow  from  communion  with  the  Soter.  While 
Valentinus  admits  to  a  certain  extent  the  efficacy  of  the 
Cross  for  the  destruction  of  evil,  it  is  hard  to  reconcile  this 
admission  with  his  erroneous  conception  of  Christ's  body. 
In  the  words,  "Father,  into  Thy  hands  I  commend  My 
spirit,"  Neander  thinks  that  the  psychical  Christ  is  made 
to  commend  to  God  the  spiritual  germ,  that  it  might  not  be 
detained  in  the  kingdom  of  the  Demiurge,  but  mount  in 
freedom  to  the  upper  sphere.  The  psychical  Messiah  finally 
rose  to  the  Demiurge,  who  gave  him  sovereignty  and  right 
to  govern  in  his  name,  while  the  pneumatic  Messiah  ascended 
to  the  heavenly  Soter,  whither  all  redeemed  spiritual  natures 
will  follow  Him. 

Ethical  Results. 

The  results  of  redemption  upon  mankind,  though  all  are 
affected  by  it,  are  not  the  same  for  all.  The  psychical  man, 
indeed,  obtains  forgiveness  of  his  sins,  is  released  from 
thraldom'  under  the  principle  of  matter,  and  receives  power 
to  withstand  it.  The  spiritual  man  is,  through  communion 
with  the  Soter,  incorporated  into  the  Pleroma,  exalted  alto- 
gether above  the  Demiurge's  kingdom,  and  attains  to  a  fully 
developed  divine  consciousness. 

The  two  classes  differ  also  in  the  manner  in  which  they 
appropriate  and  apprehend  Christianity.  The  one  are  led  to 
faith  by  outward  phenomena,  such  as  miracles,  preaching, 
precept,  and  historical  testimony.  The  other  are  seized  im- 
mediately by  the  intrinsic  might  of  the  truth,  and,  as  they 
apprehend  it  by  pure  intuition,  their  faith  is  raised  above  the 
assaults  of  doubt.  The  one  apprehend  only  a  lower  or  psy- 
chical Christianity  :  they  recognise  its  historic  evidence,  and 
receive  the  Gospel  on  the  authority  of  Christ.  The  other  rise 
to  the  apprehension  of  the  higher  pneumatical  Christianity, 


220  THE   HERETICAL   SECTS. 

which  they  grasp  in  its  vital  connection  with  the  entire 
theogonical  and  cosmogonical  process.  It  is  these  by  whom 
humanity  is  purified  and  regenerated  ;  and  in  them  lies  all  the 
hope  of  the  future,  which,  when  all  is  accomplished,  will  unite 
the  Soter  with  the  Mundane  Soul  and  receive  them  into  the 
Pleroma,  and  the  Demiurge,  at  length  fully  enlightened,  will 
enter  into  his  eternal  rest. 

Such  is  a  brief  and  sketchy  outline  of  this  extraordinary 
theory,  which  had  vitality  enough  to  engage  the  champions 
of  the  Church  for  several  generations,  and  even  then  died 
hard ;  and  yet  is  now  so  completely  passed  into  the  limbo  of 
extinct  phantasies  that  few  even  of  professed  students  of 
philosophy  care  to  master  it.  Yet  there  can  be  no  manner 
of  doubt  that  the  effort  necessary  to  grasp,  and  still  more  to 
refute,  these  seductive  hypotheses  was  in  itself  an  education 
for  the  Christian  controversialists ;  and  the  disentanglement 
of  orthodox  gnosis  from  the  half  Jewish,  half  heathen  per- 
sonages which  play  so  rampant  a  part  on  the  Gnostic  stage, 
represents  no  mean  victory  of  sober  thinking  over  "reason 
gone  mad,"  won  by  Christian  athletes  for  the  cause  of 
humanity. 

Other  Writers  of  the  School. 

Among  the  most  distinguished  writers  of  the  Valentinian 
school  may  be  mentioned  Marcus,  a  native  of  Palestine 
(circ.  A.D.  1 60),  who  set  forth  his  system  in  a  poem,  in 
which  the  Di\^ne  ^ons  were  introduced  discoursing  in 
liturgical  forms,  and  using  gorgeous  symbols  of  worship. 
He  discovered  m3'steries  in  the  number  and  position  of  the 
letters  of  the  alphabet.  He  held  the  entire  creation  to  be 
a  continuous  utterance  of  the  ineffable.  He  has  an  idea 
that  the  hidden  source  of  the  Divine  has  various  voices, 
which  descend  to  an  echo  and  finally  to  a  cessation  of  all 
sound  ;  and  again  that  this  echo  increases  to  a  clear  tone  or 
a  distinct  word  for  the  revelation  of  the  Divine  to  man. 

The  Saviour  is  spoken  of  by  Heracleon  also  as  the  Word, 
i.e.,  the  Revealer  of  the  Divine.  All  prophecy  which  foretold 
His  coming,  without  being  distinctly  conscious  of  the  higher 


VALENTINUS   AND   THE  VALENTINIANS.  221 

spiritual  Messiahsliip,  was  only  a  series  of  isolated,  inarticulate 
tones  that  preceded  the  revealing  tvord.  John  the  Baptist, 
standing  midway  between  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New, 
is  the  voice,  which  is  already  almost  a  word,  for  a  ivord  ex- 
presses a  thought  with  consciousness.  The  tone  becomes  a 
voice  when  the  Prophets  of  the  Demiurge  attain  to  the  know- 
ledge of  the  higher  Messiahsliip,  and  the  voice  a  word  when 
John  becomes  a  disciple  of  Christ. ^  Heracleon  was  distin- 
guished for  his  scientific  cast  of  mind.  His  commentary  on 
S.  John's  Gospel  is  partly  preserved  by  Origen.  He  also 
wrote  on  S.  Luke.  The  profundity  of  S.  John's  ideas  was 
specially  attractive  to  Gnostics.  Heracleon  probably  imagined 
that  he  drew  his  theology  from  S.  John,  but  his  perceptions 
were  so  warped  by  his  system  that  he  everywhere  read  his 
own  views  into  the  words  of  the  Apostle.  Like  Basilides, 
he  depreciated  martyrdom  on  the  ground  that  it  was  but  a 
single  act  of  confession,  whereas  the  consistent  self-abnega- 
tion of  an  entire  life  forms  a  truer  correspondence  to  the 
teaching  and  example  of  our  Lord. 

Another  celebrated  member  of  the  Yalentinian  School  was 
PtolemaBUS,  who  presented  his  views  in  a  highly  attractive 
form,  and  against  whom  Irenasus  directs  his  most  telling  argu- 
ments. He  was  especially  active  in  disseminating  the  principles 
of  the  sect.  His  letter  to  a  lady  named  Flora  is  still  extant  in 
the  treatise  of  Epiphanius  ;  in  this  he  draws  a  distinction 
between  the  ordinary  Christian  doctrine  and  an  apostolic 
tradition  corresponding  with  the  words  of  Christ,  of  which 
he  professed  to  be  the  special  repository.  He  endeavours  to 
prove  that  not  only  are  those  in  error  who  attribute  the 
creation  of  the  universe  to  an  evil  being,  but  those  also  who 
like  Christians  regard  it  as  the  work  of  the  Supreme  God, 
whom  Christ  came  to  reveal,  and  whom  alone  He  pronounced 
to  be  good.  His  theory  of  inspiration,  like  that  of  his  master, 
presupposes  the  co-operation  of  several  agents  in  the  produc- 
tion of  the  Old  Testament.     He  divided  the  religious  polity 

^  Our  readers  will  recall  the  remarkable  passage  of  Ignatius  which  Light- 
foot  renders  "  the  Divine  Word  which  proceedeth  from  Silence  ; "  also  the 
distinction  he  makes  between  a  voice  and  a  Word  of  God,  pp.  89  n.  and  90. 


222  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

of  Moses  into  three  parts,  coming  respectively  from  the 
Demiurge,  the  independent  reason  of  Moses,  and  the  addi- 
tions subsequently  made  by  the  elders.  Of  these  the  first 
was  the  most  important,  and  was  thus  sub-divided : — 

(i.)  A  moral  portion,  unmixed  with  any  evil  elements,  the 
same  which  Christ  said  He  came  not  to  destroy  but  to  fulfil. 
This  required  completion,  not  abrogation. 

(2.)  A  retributive  portion  with  which  evil  was  mixed,  though 
he  excuses  it  on  the  ground  of  its  educational  and  disciplinary 
necessity.  It  is,  however,  wholly  alien  from  the  goodness  of 
the  Eternal  Father,  and  was  probably  extorted  by  the  Hylic 
principle  from  the  Demiurge.  This  portion  is  entirely  abro- 
gated by  Christ.  The  State,  which  represents  retributive 
justice,  belongs  to  the  kingdom  of  the  Demiurge,  and  cannot 
be  made  a  manifestation  of  God.  Our  readers  will  remember 
the  much  discussed  remark  of  a  bishop  of  our  Church  that 
civil  laws  and  civil  constitutions  cannot  be  derived  imme- 
diately from  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 

(3.)  The  ceremonial  law.  This  he  regarded  as  wholly 
typical.  Its  outward  observance  was  abolished  by  Christ, 
but  it  was  by  Him  glorified  and  transfigured.  In  the  spiri- 
tual service  which  Christ  came  to  announce,  the  names  of 
the  old  ceremonial  (priest,  sacrifice  and  the  like)  are  pre- 
served, but  the  things  are  altered  and  spiritualised.  For 
example,  sacrifice  is  not  of  victims,  but  of  praise  and  thanks- 
giving ;  fasting  is  not  from  meat  and  drink,  but  from  lust ; 
the  Sabbath  is  not  a  rest  from  work,  but  from  evil-doing.  In 
this  respect  Ptolema3us  penetrated  to  the  spiritual  significance 
of  Christianity. 


CHAPTEE  VIII. 

SECOND  DIVISION:  THE  ANTI  -  JUDAIC  GNOSTIC 
SYSTEMS  :  OPHITES— CA RPOCRA  TES—BA  RDA  ISA  N— 
JULIUS  CA  SSI  AN  US. 

Amid  the  seething  ferment  of  opinions  in  this  tumultuous 
epoch  many  sects  arose  which,  though  not  closely  connected 
with  each  other,  agree  in  their  antagonistic  attitude  to  the 
Judaic  revelation  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  most  important 
of  these  are  the  Ophites  or  Naassseans,^  who  held  the 
doctrine  of  the  Sophia  or  Mundane  Soul  as  the  source  of 
spiritual  life,  which  they  conceived  to  have  the  power  of 
attracting  to  itself  whatever  had  emanated  from  it.  In  them 
the  Christian  element  recedes  much  further  into  the  back- 
ground than  in  the  Valentinians,  from  whom  they  borrowed 
a  considerable  portion  of  their  principles.  They  held  the 
doctrine  of  the  Demiurge  much  as  the  Valentinians,  but  gave 
him  the  mystic  name  of  laldabaoth.^  They  regarded  him  not 
as  a  limited  and  unconscious  agent  of  the  Supreme  Being, 
but  as  his  unremitting  and  eternal  antagonist.  The  higher 
light  which  he  receives  from  Sophia  he  misuses  for  the  pur- 
pose of  erecting  himself  into  an  independent  sovereign,  thus 
provoking  Sophia  to  withdraw,  if  possible,  her  ill-starred  gift. 
Nevertheless,  the  Ophites  admitted  that  the  Demiurge  was 
unconsciously  subject  to  the  power  of  the  Supreme,  whose 
puqoose  he  works  out  by  constraint,  but  without  thereby 
becoming  entitled  to  the  claim  of  goodness.  Indeed,  he  is 
represented  as  a  radically  evil  being. 

His  empire  is  the  starry  world,  which,  in  conjunction  with 
him,  strives  to  deceive  and  coerce  the  human  spirit.     The  six 
^  From   tJ'nJ   a  serpent.  -  Origen.  Cels.  vi. 


224  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

planetary  angels  create  man,  a  mere  lump  of  matter,  into 
whom  laldabaoth  breathes  a  soul,  thus  unconsciously  infusing 
some  trace  of  the  higher  Sophia,  by  which  man  centres  within 
himself  the  reason  and  soul  of  the  entire  creation.  laldabaoth, 
jealous  of  this  prerogative,  strives  in  every  way  to  quench 
man's  consciousness  of  himself.  The  better  to  effect  this,  he 
gives  him  a  series  of  commandments,  but  the  Mundane  Soul 
employs  the  serpent-spirit  ^  to  defeat  laldabaoth  by  tempt- 
ing Adam  to  disobey.  According  to  some  schools  of  Ophites, 
the  serpent  was  only  a  disguise  of  Sophia  herself ;  and  these 
really  worshipped  the  serpent  as  a  sacred  symbol. 

All  of  them  were  agreed  in  holding  that  it  was  Sophia 
who  opened  man's  eyes.  The  fall  of  man  was  a  transition 
from  the  state  of  unconscious  limitation  to  that  of  conscious, 
freedom.  ]\Ian  renounced  laldabaoth,  who  in  anger  drove 
him  from  his  abode  in  the  upper  air,  and  enclosed  him  in  a 
dark  body  and  tied  him  down  to  earth.  He  now  found  him- 
self between  two  opposing  forces ;  on  the  one  hand  the 
thraldom  of  the  seven  planetary  spirits,  and  on  the  other, 
on  the  part  of  the  material  lorinciple,  the  incitements  to  sin 
and  to  incur  laldabaoth's  wrath.  But  Sophia,  man's  constant 
friend,  supplied  him  with  new  force  to  withstand  these  new 
dangers,  and  through  the  seed  of  Seth  she  preserved  the 
higher  spiritual  ideas  for  mankind. 

In  their  Christology  they  imitated  the  Yalentinians.  The 
psychical  Christ,  the  man  Jesus,  is  related  to  the  eeon-world 
as  in  that  system.  The  heavenly  Christ  united  with  Jesus  at 
His  baptism,  and  left  Him  at  His  passion.  This  is  indicated 
by  the  fact  that  He  performed  no  miracle  before  His  baptism 
or  after  His  resurrection.  laldabaoth,  the  Judaic  God, 
being  jealous  of  the  heavenly  Christ,  determined  to  get  rid  of 
Him  by  bringing  Him  to  death.  This  he  was  able  to  effect. 
After  the  resurrection  Jesus  remained  eighteen  months  on 
earth,  teaching  a  few  select  disciples  His  inner  doctrines. 
He  was  then  raised  by  the  celestial  Christ  to  heaven,  where 
He  sits  at  laldabaoth's  right  hand,  drawing  back  to  Himself 
the  emancipated  spiritual  natures,  and  thus  enriching  His 
^  Called  in  their  system  '0<pi6/iop(pos. 


JUDAIC  GNOSTIC  SYSTEMS.  225 

kingdom  and  impoverishing  laldabaoth's.  Intermingled 
with  this  teaching  are  many  pantheistic  ideas  wholly  foreign 
to  Christianity,  on  which  it  is  not  necessary  to  dwell.  The 
moral  result  of  this  intellectual /«?Ta^o  is  an  utter  subversion 
of  the  moral  principle. 

Origen,  indeed,  in  his  work  against  Oelsus,  denies  the 
Ophites  the  title  of  Christians,  declaring  that  they  would 
only  admit  to  their  assemblies  such  as  cursed  Christ.  Some 
have  drawn  from  this  the  inference  that  the  Ophite  doctrine 
represents  a  pre-Christian  form  of  Gnosis,  introduced  about 
the  time  of  our  Lord's  birth  by  one  Euphrates :  but  the  for- 
mulae of  exorcism,  cited  by  Origen,  contain  plain  allusions 
to  Christian  ideas.  It  is  possible  that  the  hostility  of  the 
Ophites  was  directed  not  to  Christ  as  such,  but  to  the  psy- 
chical Christ  as  they  regarded  him,  confessed  by  the  Church, 
whom  they  contrasted  unfavourably  with  their  own  ^^neuma- 
tical  Christ.  And  this  hostility  may  have  gone  so  far  as  to 
take  the  form  of  a  requirement  to  curse  the  limited  Messiah 
of  psychical  natures. 

Carpocratians. 

The  Alexandrian  Carpocrates,  who  taught  in  the  first  half 
of  the  second  century,  has  many  points  of  afiinity  with  the 
Ophites,  but  in  him  the  Hellenic  element  is  far  more  joro- 
minent  than  the  Oriental.  He  is  deservedly  regarded  by  the 
Fathers  as  a  traducer  of  Christ,  and  a  baseless  pretender  to 
the  name  of  Christian.  Nevertheless  his  heresy  was  suffi- 
ciently widespread  to  demand  refutation  at  the  hands  of 
Hij)polytus  and  Irenaeus.  The  latter  states  that  he  was  the 
first  of  so-called  Christians  to  assume  the  name  of  Gnostic, 
though  others  attribute  this  to  the  Naassenes. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  do  more  than  indicate  the  outlines 
of  his  system.  He  assumed  as  the  origin  of  all  things  a  single 
First  principle,  incognisable  and  incommunicable.  From  Him 
in  various  grades  of  emanation  Powers  had  come  forth,  among 
the  lowest  of  whom  he  ranked  the  Creator  of  the  world. 

Christ  he  regarded  as  a  mere  man,  who  by  superior  insight 
into  truth  had  shaken  himself  free  from  Jewish  prejudice, 

P 


226  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

and  risen  superior  to  the  dominion  of  the  Euler  of  this  world. 
The  practical  conclusion  he  drew  from  this  theory  contri- 
buted to  render  his  name  infamous  among  Christians.  It 
was  the  absolute  indifference  of  external  conduct ;  nothing  on 
earth  was  essentially  good  or  bad.  The  Gnostic  might  prac- 
tise what  men  regard  as  immorality  without  scruple,  if  it  con- 
duced to  the  tranquillity  of  his  spirit.  Indeed,  a  man  could 
hardly  be  said  to  know  in  any  real  sense  the  comparative 
value  of  actions,  unless  he  had  had  es:[3erience  of  all  and 
selected  those  which  best  secured  his  unimpeded  course  to 
perfection.  The  reader  will  remark  the  similarity  of  this 
view  to  that  of  some  modern  Hedonists,  who  regard  the  just 
discrimination  of  higher  and  lower  pleasures  as  only  possible 
to  him  who  has  had  experience  of  both. 

The  Carpocratians  had  a  curious  custom  of  securing  mutual 
recognition  by  certain  signs  or  marks,  one  of  which  was  a 
brand  on  the  lobe  of  the  right  ear.  This  custom  is  probably 
referred  to  by  Minucius  Felix.^ 

Carpocrates  was  succeeded  by  his  illegitimate  son  Epi- 
phanes,  who  also  taught  at  Alexandria,  and  whose  career  of 
precocious  talent  closed  at  the  boyish  age  of  seventeen.  He 
was  the  founder  of  what  was  known  as  the  "  Monadic  Gnosis," 
and  it  was  through  him  that  the  members  of  the  sect  received 
the  name  of  Caipocratians.  His  best  known  work  was  a 
treatise  "  On  Justice,"  in  which  he  insisted  on  an  equality 
of  right  to  everything  as  a  Divine  ordinance,  extending  this 
principle  not  only  to  j)roperty  in  the  conventional  sense,  but 
even  to  the  relations  of  the  sexes.  We  owe  this  account  to 
the  testimony  of  Clement,  who  had  evidently  read  the  book. 

More  doubtful  is  the  ascription  to  him  of  the  doctrine  of 
"  The  Tetrad,"  mentioned  by  Iren^eus  as  proceeding  from  a 
renowned  master  of  the  school.^  He,  however,  does  not  give 
the  name,  and  it  is  much  more  probable  that  Marcus  is  the 
author  referred  to. 

^  Chap.  ix.  31.     Cf.  "  Having  his  mark  in  their  foreheads  *'  (Kev.  xx.  4). 

^  dXXos  ein(f>av7}^  5Ldd<7Ka\os  avruiv.  It.  iv.  25  (clarus  magister  eorum) 
reproduced  in  the  Greek  by  Hippolytus,  Ref.  H.  vi.  38.  Epiphanius  care- 
lessly takes  the  word  iirKpaprjs  to  be  a  proper  name. 


JUDAIC   GNOSTIC  SYSTEMS.  227 

Sethites,  Cainites,  and  Nicolaitans. 

More  or  less  closely  connected  with  the  Ophites  were  those 
obscure  sects  who  held  that  the  ^on  Sophia  found  means  to 
preserve  through  every  period  of  the  Demiurge's  world  a  race 
bearing  within  it  the  spiritual  seed  which  was  akin  to  her 
own  nature. 

Thus  the  Sethites  regarded  Cain  as  representing  the 
hylic  principle,  Abel  the  psychic,  and  Seth,  the  elect  nature, 
the  spiritual.  The  Cainites,  on  the  contrary,  assigned  the 
highest  place  to  Cain.  In  their  wild  hatred  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  the  Demiurge,  they  took  for  representatives  the 
worst  characters  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  being  rebels  against 
the  tyranny  of  the  Demiurge,  and,  as  such,  children  of  Sophia. 
The  Apostles  appeared  to  them  narrow-minded ;  Judas  alone 
was  truly  enlightened,  and  he  betrayed  Christ  from  a  good 
motive,  as  the  only  way  to  dethrone  the  Demiurge.  Under  the 
name  of  Judas  they  concocted  a  gospel  embodying  their  gnosis. 
In  moral  respects,  their  licentiousness  was  unbridled. 

Somewhat  similar  tendencies  are  to  be  found  in  the  obscure 
sect  of  the  Nicolaitans,  mentioned  by  Irengeus  as  the  same 
who  are  condemned  by  S.  John  in  the  Apocalypse."^  But  it 
is  questionable  whether  in  the  passage  referred  to  the  Apostle 
has  before  him  an  already  existing  sect,  and  does  not  rather 
mean  to  characterise  by  a  telling  epithet  opinions  which  he 
regards  as  unwholesomely  seductive.^  Iren^eus,  like  the 
still  more  uncritical  Tertullian,  is  prepared  to  find  all  existing 
heresies  disposed  of  by  anticipation  in  the  New  Testament. 
But  as  Clement  also  mentions  the  sect  as  one  actually  exist- 
ing, and  tracing  its  origin  to  Nicolas  or  Nicolaus  the  proselyte 
of  Antioch  spoken  of  in  the  Acts,  there  can  be  no  question 
as  to  its  historical  reality,  though  it  is  in  the  highest  degree 
improbable  that  Nicolas,  who  died  in  the  faith  and  left  faith- 
ful children,  had  anything  to  do  with  it.  The  chief  tenet  of 
the  Nicolaitans  was  the  advisability  of  subduing  the  animal 

1  Eev.  ii.  15. 

-  viKoXaos  has  been  thought  by  some  to  be  a  rendering  of  Dy^3  Balaam, 
according  to  its  supposed  derivation  from  DV  V?2lj  popvZum  substravit. 


228  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

nature  by  yielding  to  it.  Clement  mentions  a  story  that 
Nicolas,  being  charged  by  the  Apostles  with  jealousy  of  his 
wife,  refuted  the  imputation  by  bringing  her  forward  in 
the  assembly,  and  offering  her  to  any  who  might  be  willing 
to  marry  her.  This  is,  of  course,  wholly  apocryphal.  The 
Nicolaitans,  wishing  to  shield  themselves  under  some  famous 
name,  and  observing  the  title  of  Nicolaitan  applied  to  anta- 
gonists of  the  detested  Apostle,  they  determined  to  assume 
it,  and  jum23ed  to  the  uncritical  conclusion  that  it  was  derived 
from  Nicolas.  They  appear  to  have  been  strongly  anti- 
Judaic  in  their  prejudices,  and  to  have  acknowledged  S.  Paul 
as  the  only  apostle. 


Bardaisan  or  Bardesanes. 

This  somewhat  isolated  thinker  was  a  Syrian  theosophist, 
and  perhaps  is  without  sufficient  reason  classed  among  the 
Gnostics.  He  was  born  at  Edessa  a.d.  155,  of  noble  j)arents, 
and  is  said  to  have  left  the  heathen  doctrine  of  the  priest  of 
Hierapolis  to  receive  holy  baptism.  Possibly  Christianity 
was  already  partially  recognised  at  the  court  of  Abgarus  the 
king.  In  216  Caracalla  intervened  in  the  iDolitics  of  Edessa, 
where  he  seems  to  have  espoused  the  cause  of  the  heathen 
conservative  party.  Bardesanes,  put  on  trial,  proved  his 
faith  to  be  sincere,  and  almost  attained  the  honours  of  a 
Confessor.  He  seems  to  have  preached  Christianity  as  he 
understood  it  to  some  of  the  wild  tribes,  and  to  have  held  a 
religious  conference  with  some  Indian  philosophers  in  the 
reign  of  the  latest  Antonine  (i.e.,  Elagabalus).  His  death 
is  placed  in  a.d.  223,  at  the  commencement  of  the  reign  of 
Alexander  Severus. 

His  Theolog'y. — Hardly  any  of  his  writings  survive,  for 
the  Book  of  the  Laivs  of  Countries,  which  embodies  his  views, 
is  from  the  hand  of  a  disciple.  Epiphanius  asserts  that  he 
was  the  distinguished  author  of  many  orthodox  books,  but 
was  afterwards  corrupted  by  the  Valentinians.  Eusebius, 
however,  reverses  the  process,  dwelling  on  his  controversial 
writings  against  Marcionism,  and  enlists  him  on  the  side  of 


JUDAIC  GNOSTIC  SYSTEMS.  229 

the  Church.  Ephraim  Syrus  speaks  of  a  treatise  in  which 
he  denies  the  Eesurrection,  and  of  his  hundred  and  fifty 
heretical  hymns,  though  Theodoret  attributes  the  first  Syrian 
hymns  to  Harmonius,  Bardaisan's  son.  Ephraim  himself 
wrote  a  counterblast  in  the  shape  of  fifty  hymns  against 
heresies,  of  which  only  a  small  number  are  directed  against 
Bardaisan's  views. 

That  he  acccepted  the  ordinary  Christian  faith  is  very 
probable ;  but  he  ran  riot  in  an  outer  region  of  speculation, 
of  which  he  had  drunk  deeply  in  his  heathen  days,  viz.,  the 
theory  of  the  divine  influences  of  stars,  whom  he  spoke  of  as 
living  beings,  in  apparent  defiance  of  the  Divine  Unity.  He 
may  have  held  the  eternity  of  matter,  but  this  is  doubtful, 
and  his  doctrine  of  evil  is  also  doubtfully  dualistic.  He  is 
said  to  have  called  the  Holy  Spirit  the  "  Secret  Mother," 
probably  with  reference  to  Christ,  after  the  manner  of  the 
Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews. ^  He  denied  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  flesh ;  attributed  to  our  Lord  a  heavenly,  not  an 
ordinary  body ;  mixed  up  the  problem  of  human  destiny  with 
that  of  the  seven  stars,  which  he  taught  held  sway  over  man's 
birth  until  the  Star  of  Bethlehem  appeared.  As  it  is,  bap- 
tism (not  the  washing,  but  the  concomitant  illumination  of 
spirit)  frees  men  from  astral  bondage,  and  makes  the  art 
of  the  astrologer  of  none  effect. 

His  Affinities. — Although  Hippolytus,  Iren^us,  Epipha- 
nius,  Moses  of  Chorene,  and  Barhebra^us  all  speak  of  him  as 
a  Valentinian,  there  is  really  little  in  his  authentic  doctrine 
which  savours  of  Valentinus.  Hippolytus,  in  his  Sixth  Book 
against  Heresies,  distinguishes  between  the  Christology  of  the 
Eastern  and  Italian  Valentinian s.  It  is  possible  that  Bar- 
daisan  passed  under  this  Eastern  influence  before  becoming  a 
Christian,  and  his  account  of  Christ's  body  may  be  a  trace  of 
it.  He  seems  to  have  held  a  position  intermediate  between 
Gnosticism  and  the  Church — a  sort  of  semi-heretic. 

His  Writing's. — These  were  in  Syriac,  but  early  translated 
into  Greek,  and  so  known  to  several  of  the  Fathers.  They 
include  Dialogues  against  the  Marcionists,  an  Apology  issued 
^  Origen  in  John  iv.  63. 


230  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

under  the  persecution  of  Antoninus  (Elagabalus),  and  the 
Dialogue  of  Fate,  which  perhaps,  however,  is  identical  with 
the  Book  of  the  Laics  of  Countries,  discovered  and  published 
by  Cureton  in  his  Sjncilegium,  but  partly  preserved  by 
Eusebius  in*'a  Greek  dress.^  In  form  it  is  a  dialogue  between 
two  young  men  concerning  the  mysteries  of  Providence. 
Their  doubts  are  taken  up  and  resolved  by  Bardaisan,  whose 
opportune  arrival  gives  rise  to  a  somewhat  lengthy  exposition. 
The  work  is  probably  posterior  to  Bardaisan,  but  fairly  repre- 
sents his  views.  It  treats  of  free-will,  the  two  command- 
ments ("  eschew  evil  and  do  good "),  the  power  of  destiny 
and  of  nature,  the  moral  customs  of  different  countries,  and 
the  final  victory  of  the  great  and  holy  Will  that  none  can 
hinder.  It  is  probable  that  the  Greek  translation  was  em- 
ployed by  the  author  of  the  ninth  book  of  the  Clementine 
Recognitions,  though  others  give  him  the  priority. 

Results. — This  school  of  thought  spread  little,  if  at  all, 
beyond  Syria,  until  in  the  latter  years  of  Constantine  two 
anonymous'^Greek  dialogues  were  written  to  controvert  the 
followers  of  Marcion,  Valentine,  and  Bardaisan.  The  heretical 
adversary  is  introduced  as  insisting  on  three  divergences 
from  the  Catholic  faith,  viz.,  a  denial  of  the  creation  of  Satan 
by  God,  of  the  birth  of  Christ  from  a  woman,  and  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  bod}^.  In  this  later  form  of  his  theory, 
while  admitting  evil  to  be  self-sprung,  he  does  not  believe  it 
to  be  eternal  or  indestructible.  The  local  speculations  about 
the  stars  are  now  dropped,  and  a  more  distinct  Greek  colour- 
ing is  adopted  throughout.  We  observe  also  an  increased 
readiness  to  appeal  to  Scripture,  and  a  slight  trace  of  Mani- 
chean  influence. 

Julius  Cassianus. 

A  few  words  must  be  given  to  Julius  Cassianus  (about 
A.D.  200),  to  whom  reference  has  already  been  made.  He  is 
one  of  those  Gnostics  who  regard  matter  as  essentially  evil, 
and  condemn  the  marriage  union,  referring  all  sexual  inter- 
course  to  the  temptation  of   the   Serpent.     He  quotes   in 

^  Prsep.  Evan.  vi.  9,  10. 


JUDAIC  GNOSTIC  SYSTEMS.  231 

support  o£  his  doctrine  an  apocryphal  saying  of  our  Lord, 
quoted  also  in  the  Pseudo-Clement's  Epistle,^  which  Clement 
of  Alexandria  notices  is  contained  in  the  Gospel  according  to 
the  Egyptians.  His  Encratite  views  are  closely  connected 
with  his  Docetic  theory  already  noticed ;  the  birth  of  children 
being  per  sc  an  evil,  Christ  evidently  could  not  have  been 
born,  and  His  humanity  was  therefore  illusory.  He  also 
taught  that  man  had  not  been  originally  created  with  a 
fleshly  body,  but  that  the  coats  of  skins  mentioned  in  Genesis 
as  having  been  made  by  God  for  Adam  and  Eve  were  in 
reality  our  fleshly  integument,  then  first  formed.  The  coin- 
cidences between  him  and  Tatian  are  too  numerous  to  be 
accidental.     It  is  uncertain  which  borrowed  from  the  other. 


APPENDIX  A. 

A  few  words  •  may  here  be  said  with  regard  to  the  curious 
Gnostic  work  preserved  in  a  Coptic  MS.  in  the  British  Museum, 
written  in  the  Thebaic  dialect,  and  edited  and  translated  into 
Latin  by  Schwartze,  and  generally  known  as  Pistis  Sophia.  It 
probably  belongs  to  a  later  period  than  that  with  which  we  are 
concerned,  though  many  scholars  believe  that  an  earlier  recension 
of  it  existed  as  far  back  as  the  middle  of  the  third  century.  The 
Greek  original  has  perished,  but  many  of  the  Greek  terms  are 
embedded  in  the  Coptic  version  which  remains.  It  comprises 
four  books  or  sections.  The  first  two  treat  of  Pistis-Sophia  ;  the 
third  and  fourth  are  entitled  /xspog  reb^uv  OMrripo;.  The  fourth 
is  defective,  and  represents  an  older  form  of  the  teaching.  The 
three  books  represent  Jesus  as  giving  instruction  to  His  disciples 
for  eleven  years  after  the  Resurrection.  He  then  ascends  into 
heaven,  completes  the  work  of  redemption,  and  returns  to  give 
the  finishing  touches  to  His  scheme  of  higher  knowledge.  The 
fourth  book  represents  Jesus  as  standing  after  His  Resurrection 
on  the  ocean  shore,  surrounded  by  men  and  women  clothed  in 
white  robes,  who  retire  with  Him  to  the  middle  sphere.  The 
aeons,  archons,  and  cosmical  powers  stand  aside,  while  He 
instructs  the  elect  in  many  secret  mysteries.  Mary  Magdalene 
takes  a  prominent  part  in  addressing  questions  to  Christ.  Now 
Epiphanius  mentions  a  book  in  use  among  the  Ophites,  called 

1  See  pp.  42,  165. 


232  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

spur-/)Oii;  Mccplac^  or  Questions  of  Mary^  and  another  called  the 
Gospel  of  Philip.  The  Pistis- Sophia  can  hardly  be  identified 
with  either  of  these,  but  we  observe  that  in  it  Philip  is  mentioned, 
together  with  Matthew  and  Thomas,  as  one  of  the  three  chosen 
by  Christ  to  write  down  His  revelations.  We  therefore  class  this 
work  among  the  productions  of  the  Ophite  school,  though  it  does 
not  agree  exactly  with  any  of  the  Ophite  tenets  that  have  come 
down  to  us.  It  is  Pantheistic  rather  than  Dualistic.  Its  source 
is  not  Syrian,  but  Alexandrian,  and  it  was  originally  written  in 
Greek,  not  Syriac.  It  has  also  some  affinities  with  Catholic  doc- 
trine. It  greatly  modifies  the  distinction  between  psychics  and 
pneumatics,  so  dear  to  the  Ophites.  It  shows  a  tone  of  moral 
earnestness  which  recalls  Basilides  alone  among  Gnostic  writers ; 
and  it  represents  the  path  of  salvation  as  twofold,  partly  by  the 
mysteries  of  redemption  and  partly  by  moral  holiness,  while  it 
utterly  condemns  the  immoralities  permitted  by  the  genuine 
Ophites. 

APPENDIX  B. 

A  work  which  Epiphanius  declares  to  have  been  used  by  the 
Sethites,  and  which  in  its  original  form  belongs  to  the  second  cen- 
tury, is  The  Testament  of  Abraham,  recently  edited  by  Professor 
James  in  the  Cambridge  "  Texts  and  Studies."  It  was  subjected 
to  several  recensions,  and  translated  into  various  dialects.  It  can 
hardly  be  called  a  Christian  treatise,  though  used  by  Christians, 
and  influencing  to  no  small  extent  their  popular  beliefs.  It  con- 
tained a  romantic  account  of  the  last  hours  of  Abraham,  followed 
by  a  thrilling  apocalyptic  section  supposed  to  be  his  vision  of  the 
future  world.  The  most  remarkable  feature  of  this  is  its  pro 
nounced  pessimism,  the  proportion  of  the  saved  to  the  lost  being 
variously  given  as  i  in  7000  or  i  in  60,000  !  So  despairing  an 
estimate  of  Christ's  redemption  was  not  likely  to  find  a  welcome 
in  the  early  Church,  where  the  conception  of  the  Christian's  in- 
heritance stood  so  high.  Many  small  communities  of  enthusiasts 
sprang  up  everywhere  on  the  fringe  of  Christianity  and  Judaism, 
who  were  to  some  extent  influenced  by  their  teaching,  and  adopted 
much  of  their  nomenclature,  but  knew  little  or  nothing  of  the  true 
spirit  of  either.  Such  unquestionably  was  the  origin  of  this 
work,  which,  being  now  well  edited  and  generally  accessible,  may 
be  read  with  advantage  by  the  curious  in  matters  theological. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

SECOND  DIVISION  CONTINUED .—MARCION  AND  HIS 
SCHOOL  (from  a.d.  140). 

We  have  now  to  consider  a  far  more  interesting  personage. 
Of  all  the  Gnostics,  Marcion  is  unquestionably  the  greatest 
and  the  best.  In  some  respects  he  is  not  a  Gnostic  at  all. 
The  very  essence  of  Gnosticism  is  to  make  religion  a  spe- 
culative theosophy  instead  of  a  j)ractice  of  righteousness. 
Into  this  error  Marcion  did  not  fall.  His  system,  though 
mistaken,  was  really  religious.  His  theoretical  position, 
however,  like  that  of  the  Gnostics,  was  dualistic.  But  this 
was  the  least  original  part  of  his  work.  If  tradition  may  be 
believed,  it  was  borrowed  by  him  at  Rome  from  the  genuine 
Gnostic  Oerdo  (a.d.  140).  The  doctrines  which  issued  from 
their  combined  efforts  were  such  as  we  have  met  with  already 
in  slightly  different  forms  :  that  the  Creator  of  the  world  was 
not  the  Supreme  God,  but  a  far  lower  and  strictly  limited 
being;  that  Moses  and  the  prophets  were  not  divinely  in- 
spired; that  Jesus  Christ  was  sent  down  direct  from  the 
Supreme  God,  and  had  no  real  connection  with  the  world  of 
matter;  that  the  body,  which  draws  its  elements  from  evil 
matter,  cannot  after  death  rejoin  the  soul,  which  alone  enters 
the  pleroma  of  light ;  that  those  parts  of  Scripture  which  teach 
otherwise  are  corrupted  and  pseudonymous. 

Such,  in  very  brief  outline,  are  the  speculative  tenets  of 
Marcion's  school ;  but  they  do  not  reflect  his  true  genius : 
this  was  practical,  not  speculative.  His  true  distinction 
is  the  prominence  he  gives  to  Christ  and  Christ's  work. 
To  him  Christianity  is  no  longer  one  of  many  tendencies, 
albeit  the  greatest ;  it  forms  the  inspiration  of  his  whole 

mind;    all    the    Jewish    and    Pagan    elements    are    recast 

233 


234  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

under  the  influence  of  a  remarkable  and  higlily  original 
Christology. 

In  order  to  appreciate  his  teaching,  it  will  be  necessary  to 
touch  on  the  few  incidents  we  possess  of  his  life.  He  was 
born,  early  in  the  second  century,  at  Sinope  in  Pontus,  the 
same  city  that  had  given  the  great  Cynic  Diogenes  to  the 
world.  Epiphanius  asserts,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt 
the  assertion,  that  his  father  was  bisho^D  of  the  church  there. 
It  is  not  absolutely  certain  that  he  was  brought  up  in  the 
Christian  faith,  but  it  may  be  assumed  as  in  the  highest  degree 
probable.  There  is  even  some  ground  for  thinking  that  he 
may  have  held  the  office  of  suffragan  to  his  father,  inasmuch 
as  his  own  followers  subsequently  recognised  him  as  bishop. 
The  depreciatory  epithet  of  nauclerus  (shipmaster  or  passenger) 
flung  at  him  by  Tertullian,  need  not  mean  more  than  that 
he  had  travelled  much  by  sea.  It  is  obvious  that  he  was  of 
a  restless,  inquiring  mind.  The  speculations  of  Basilides 
and  Valentinus  were  attracting  widespread  notice.  Possibly 
Marcion  may  have  fallen  under  their  spell  before  he  conceived 
the  project  of  visiting  Rome,  and  broaching  his  opinions  in 
the  metropolis.  He  seems  to  have  arrived  there  just  at  the 
close  of  the  episcopate  of  Hyginus  (about  a.d.  140). 

The  Roman  Church  was  at  first  disposed  to  receive  him 
graciously.  His  munificent  contributions  to  its  common 
chest,  his  father's  character,  his  own  strictness  of  life  and 
conspicuous  abilities,  for  a  time  secured  him  favour.  But 
this  did  not  last.  His  ambition  began  to  display  itself,  and 
the  austere  type  of  piety  which  he  cultivated  was  distasteful 
to  the  Roman  clergy.  For  this  and  other  reasons  they  looked 
coldly  on  him,  and  finally  refused  him  communion.  He  now 
proceeded  to  feel  his  way  towards  the  position  of  a  heretical 
teacher.  The  Syrian  Gnostic  Cerdo  was  at  Rome,  and  to 
him  Marcion  attached  himself  as  disciple  or  comrade,  with 
the  results  which  have  been  already  indicated.  It  is,  how- 
ever, possible  that  Marcion  had  already  thought  out  his 
leading  ideas  before  his  contact  with  Cerdo.  At  any  rate 
they  were  now  embodied  in  a  coherent  system,  and  Marcion 
lost  no  time  in  projDagating  them  throughout  the  Empire. 


MARCION  AND   HIS  SCHOOL.  235 

His  influence  was  enormous,  his  activity  incessant,  and  the 
importance  of  his  sect  or  church  may  be  gauged  by  the 
number  of  eminent  men  who  wrote  against  it.  The  attack 
was  begun  by  Justin,  continued  by  Dionysius,  Theophilus, 
Irenaeus,  Hippolytus  and  Tertullian.  Two  centuries  later 
Epiphanms  found  Marcionite  congregations  in  Italy,  Syria, 
Palestine,  Lower  Egypt,  and  even  in  the  Thebaid,  Arabia, 
and  Persia.  He  paid  a  second  visit  to  Rome  during  the 
episcopate  of  Anicetus  (a.d.  154-166)  and,  according  to  a 
doubtful  story  of  Tertullian's  ^  begged  for  readmission  into 
the  Church.  This  was  promised  on  condition  of  a  full  recan- 
tation of  his  errors,  and  an  undertaking  to  bring  back  those 
whom  he  had  led  astray.  He  gave  the  pledge  ;  but  his 
death,  which  happened  shortly  after,  prevented  him  from 
redeeming  it.  It  was  during  this  Roman  visit  that  he  met 
the  aged  Polycarp,  whom  he  had  known  in  happier  days. 
Seeing  the  bishop's  face  averted,  he  accosted  him  with  the 
words,  "  Dost  thou  not  remember  me,  Polycarp  ?  "  to  which 
the  stern  old  man  replied,  "Aye  !  I  remember  thee  for  the 
firstborn  of  Satan."  His  death  may  be  placed  about  the  year 
166.  His  career  therefore  cannot  have  been  a  long  one 
measured  by  years,  though  it  covered  the  episcopates  of  no 
less  than  five  Roman  bishops. 

His  Doctrines. — Our  chief  source  of  information  as  to  his 
doctrines  is  the  exhaustive  treatise  of  Tertullian.  Irenaeus, 
besides  supplying  m.auy  facts  of  interest  in  his  great  work 
against  heresies,  probably  wrote  a  separate  dissertation,  in 
which  he  followed  the  method  of  convicting  him  by  his  own 
inconsistencies.  Tertullian,  whom  in  other  respects  we  know 
to  have  been  largely  indebted  to  Irenseus,  imitates  him  in  this 
point  also  with  considerable  success.  His  first  book  against 
Marcion  was  written  A.D.  208,  shortly  before  the  Syntagma  of 
Hippolytus  appeared,  which  also  dealt  copiously  with  Marcion 
and  his  views. 

The  three  cardinal  points  of  his  system  are  as  follows : — 

I.  That  the  Supreme  God,  who  is  absolutely  good,  cannot 

1  Irenajus  tells  nearly  the  same  story  of  Cerdo :  and  it  is  possible  that 
Tertullian  is  inaccurately  reproducing  Irenoous. 


236  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

possibly  enter  into  any  union  with  matter.  The  world  there- 
fore cannot  be  created  by  God,  but  is  the  work  of  an 
inferior  being,  who  is  ever  in  conflict  with  matter  but  cannot 
overcome  it. 

2.  That  the  Supreme  God  has  once  and  once  only  revealed 
Himself  in  Christ.  Christ  and  Christ's  religion  is  therefore 
for  man  the  only  possible  manifestation  of  the  absolute  good. 

3.  That  true  goodness  consists  in  love  and  in  love  only. 
Justice  or  the  retributive  principle  is  in  its  nature  opposed  to 
love,  and  therefore  cannot  be  affirmed  of  the  Supreme  God. 

Important  consequences  follow  from  each  of  these  prin- 
ciples. From  the  first  is  derived  the  violently  anti-Jewish 
attitude  which  distinguished  Marcion  above  all  other  here- 
tics. The  God  of  the  Jews  according  to  him  does  not  work 
after  the  pattern  of  ideal  perfection,  but  is  the  independent 
Creator  of  an  imperfect  world  answering  to  his  own  imper- 
fection. He  can  infuse  no  truly  spiritual  essence  into  the 
soul  of  man,  for  he  has  it  not  himself,  while  man's  body  is 
of  course  wholly  evil.  The  Demiurge  gives  men  command- 
ments, but  no  power  to  keep  them.  To  the  Jews  he  gave 
indeed  a  revelation  of  himself,  and  a  religion  of  worship  and 
morality  corresponding  to  his  own  character,  with  a  limited 
heaven  to  the  obedient  and  perdition  to  all  the  rest.  Con- 
scious of  his  inability  to  make  his  subjects  truly  good,  he 
promised  them  a  Messiah  who  should  raise  them  to  his  own 
level,  gather  them  from  the  dispersion,  and  grant  them 
earthly  felicity  in  a  world-embracing  kingdom.  The  true 
God,  however,  could  not  consent  to  this  over-severe  system ; 
His  heart  swelled  with  pity  for  the  perishing.  He  does  not 
issue  a  law  confessedly  impossible  to  be  fulfilled ;  but  reveals 
Himself,  and  enters  into  communion  with  all  who  will  accept 
His  revelation.  His  self-manifestation  of  the  Supreme  is 
the  appearance  of  Christ,  who  brings  a  new  God  into  the 
world,  unknown  before.  This  is  the  dualism  of  Marcion,  so 
mercilessly  satirised  by  Tertullian. 

From  his  second  principle  it  follows  that  Christ's  ap- 
pearance in  the  world  was  a  sudden  phenomenon,  like  an 
earthquake,  wholly  unconnected  with  the  past  either  by  way 


MARCION  AND   HIS   SCHOOL.  237 

o£  prediction  or  preparation.  The  transcendental  relation  of 
Christ  to  the  Supreme  God  is  not  clearly  defined  by  Marcion. 
While  distinguishing  them  in  some  sense,  he  nevertheless 
regards  Christ  as  an  immediate  manifestation  of  Deity. 
Thus  his  theory  of  Christ's  person  is  necessarily  Docetic  ;  for, 
had  he  sprung  from  a  human  mother,  he  must  have  been  con- 
nected with  matter  and  therefore  a  subject  of  the  Demiurge. 
Hence  the  Gospel  of  Marcion  commences  with  these  words, 
"  In  the  fifteenth  year  of  Tiberius  Caesar  Clirist  came  dovm 
from  heaven."  We  have  his  views  on  this  subject  fully 
given  in  Tertullian's  treatise,  "  On  the  Flesh  of  Christ  "  {de 
Came  Christi). 

Christology  of  Marcion. — It  is  an  essential  feature  of 
Marcion's  Christology  that  Jesus  was  not  the  Messiah  pro- 
mised by  the  Demiurge  through  the  Prophets.  He  strongly 
contrasts  the  Christ  of  the  Old  Testament  with  the  Christ  of 
the  Gospel,  and  declares  that  Jesus  only  accommodated  Him- 
self to  Jewish  prejudice  in  allowing  Himself  to  be  styled  the 
Jewish  Messiah.  His  immediate  power  over  nature,  and  His 
godlike  acts  of  mercy  and  pardon  to  His  enemies,  proclaim 
His  true  Divinity  and  dissociate  Him  from  the  Demiurge. 
It  is  this  that  accounts  for  His  readier  reception  among  the 
heathen  than  among  His  own  countrymen,  for  they  were 
less  prejudiced  by  preconceived  interpretations  of  the  Old 
Testament.  The  Demiurge,  unable  to  comprehend  such  an 
invasion  of  superior  Godhead,  sided  against  Christ,  and 
stirred  up  the  Jews  and  Romans  to  crucify  Him.  Though 
in  Marcion's  view  Christ  did  not  really  suffer,  yet  the 
Demiurge  imagined  that  He  did,  and  wished  to  consign 
Him  to  the  hell  of  those  who  had  disobeyed  him ;  but  Jesus 
again  disappointed  him  by  raising  the  souls  of  the  Gentiles 
who  were  undergoing  |)unishment  to  His  own  heaven.  Then 
at  length  the  Demiurge  was  made  to  understand  the  drift  of 
what  had  happened,  and  to  acknowledge  his  own  blindness. 

It  seems  as  if  Marcion  taught  that  the  Messianic  predic- 
tions of  the  Old  Testament  would  be  accomplished  for  such 
as  believed  in  the  Demiurge.  He  would  bring  to  judgment 
those  who  had  not  been  freed  from  his  power  by  faith  in  the 


238  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

higher  Christ,  and  they,  together  with  the  Old  Testament 
saints,  would  enjoy  the  reward  of  an  earthly  millennium. 
The  eternal  and  heavenly  kingdom  into  which  Christians 
enter  is  the  antithesis  of  this  millennial  paradise.  The  God 
of  love  does  not  punish,  but  He  gives  over  to  the  Demiurge 
and  the  sphere  of  justice  those  who  refuse  Him,  while  those 
who  even  on  earth  enter  into  fellowship  with  the  Father, 
through  faith  of  the  Son,  are  made  partakers  of  a  life  supe- 
rior to  matter  and  to  the  Demiurge.  For  such  there  is  no 
more  judgment.  The  providential  care  of  the  Supreme  God 
is  reserved  for  the  elect  alone ;  while  for  those  outside  the 
Demiurge  has  his  own  providence,  both  general  and  special. 

From  his  third  principle  of  the  antithesis  between  justice 
and  love  follows  the  absolute  incompatibility  of  the  Law  and 
the  Gospel.  The  latter  alone  had  power  to  sanctify.  Mar- 
cion's  own  life,  and  the  moral  standard  of  the  community 
which  he  founded,  were  marked  by  a  lofty  rigour.  His  asce- 
ticism was  based  on  the  disparagement  not  only  of  meats  and 
drinks,  but  of  marriage,  which,  as  perpetuating  the  material 
element,  he  regarded  as  no  less  blameworthy  than  fornication. 
Life  itself  he  valued  little.  The  seriousness  of  his  discipline 
provoked  the  hatred  of  the  Pagans.  The  success  of  his 
church  organisation  inflamed  the  anger  of  the  orthodox. 
Persecuted  by  both  alike,  he  and  his  adherents  were  daily 
inured  to  suffering.  "  Fellow-objects  of  hatred  and  fellow- 
sufferers  ! "  thus  he  addresses  his  co-religionists.  He  urges 
them  never  to  lose  an  opportunity  of  testifying  their  belief 
by  dying  for  it.  Like  the  Montanists,  though  from  a  different 
motive,  these  sectaries  were  always  ready  for  martyrdom. 

To  Marcion  belongs  the  merit  of  a  genuine  enthusiasm, 
an  inspiring  personality,  and  a  truly  organising  genius.  It 
was  this  last  feature  that  enabled  him  to  perpetuate  for  cen- 
turies a  system  of  doctrine  so  absolutely  irreconcilable  with 
the  true  doctrine  of  the  Church.  But  harsh  and  unphiloso- 
phical  as  it  was,  it  paid  homage  to  Christ,  and  it  professed 
to  be  built  on  Him.  In  the  words  of  Christ  and  the  apos- 
tolic comments  on  them  was  to  be  found  the  only  source  of 
truth.     Much  of  his  influence  was  due  to  his  bold  claim  to 


MARCION  AND   HIS   SCHOOL.  239 

possess  the  authentic  words  of  Christ  and  the  true  key  to 
their  interpretation.  He  dealt  with  the  New  Testament 
with  the  utmost  freedom.  Like  Luther,  he  discovered  a 
gospel  within  the  Gospel,  but  he  carried  the  process  infinitely 
further.  He  found  in  S.  Paul  the  only  genuine  representa- 
tion of  Christ,  and  consequently  rejected  all  the  New  Testa- 
ment that  was  not  Pauline.  He  re- wrote  the  Gospel  on  this 
supposed  Pauline  plan,  which  was  substantially  S.  Luke's, 
only  that  he  rejected  all  such  portions  as  did  not  square  with 
his  Docetic  views.  "  Marcion's  Gospel  "  is  frequently  alluded 
to  by  the  Fathers,  and  quoted  so  freely  by  Tertullian,  that 
we  can  almost  reconstruct  it  from  his  writings.  The  other 
Gospels  he  rejected,  not  on  critical  grounds,  but  because  he 
thought  them  corruptions  of  the  original.  He  seems  to  have 
considered  this  corruption  due  to  the  Galilean  Apostles ! 
Even  his  mutilated  and  abridged  S.  Luke  is  so  uncritically 
put  together  that  many  inconsistencies  remain  in  it.  Besides 
this  book,  he  admitted  also  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  excluding 
those  to  Timothy  and  Titus ;  but  even  these  he  claimed  the 
right  to  correct,  and  to  expunge  from  them  every  shred  of 
Judaism.  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  he  rejected,  not  from 
its  defective  authority,  for  that  would  have  no  weight  with 
him,  but  from  its  sacrificial  ideas. 

Another  celebrated  work  of  his  was  the  Antitheses,  or  sets 
of  passages  showing  contradiction  between  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  frequently  alluded  to  by  Tertullian.  They  appear 
to  have  been  arranged  with  much  acumen,  and  were  doubt- 
less effective  enough  from  his  point  of  view,  according  to 
which  the  two  Testaments  proceed  from  different  deities, 
and  therefore  it  was  vain  to  bridge  over  external  discre- 
pancies by  the  hypothesis  of  a  spiritual  unity,  which  obviously 
was  out  of  the  question. 


His  Disciples,  Apelles,  Hermogenes. 

In  the  community  that  he  founded  differences  of  opinion 
soon  appeared.  His  system  had  so  little  speculative  com- 
pleteness that  inquiring  minds  were  not  satisfied.     His  most 


240  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

ardent  follower,  who  afterwards,  according  to  Tertullian, 
turned  ''deserter,"  was  Apelles,  an  Asiatic  by  extraction, 
who  was  born  about  120.  He  is  said  by  Tertullian  to  have 
been  taught  by  Marcion  at  Eome,  from  whence  he  was 
obliged,  owing  to  an  act  of  incontinence,  to  emigrate  to  Alex- 
andria. He  was  induced  to  regard  the  utterances  of  a  woman 
named  Philumene,  a  possessed  virgin  or  clairvoyante,  as  the 
inspired  oracles  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  his  intercourse  with 
her  gave  rise,  as  might  be  expected,  to  scandalous  stories, 
which,  however,  appear  to  be  entirely  without  foundation. 
He  lived  to  a  green  old  age,  as  we  learn  from  the  account 
given  by  Rhodon,  an  opponent  of  his  doctrine,  whom  Eusebius 
places  in  the  reign  of  Commodus  (a.d.  180-193).  A  writing 
by  Philumene  entitled  "  Manifestations  "  was  considered  by 
Apelles  as  authoritative,  and  selections  from  it  read  in  his 
conventicle.  He  himself  wrote  a  series  of  Argumentative 
Proofs  (avWoyccTfjiol)  criticising  the  Mosaic  theology,  which 
in  their  turn  were  controverted  by  Ehodon.  As  he  grew 
older,  he  became  more  tolerant,  confessing  that  he  had  failed 
to  prove  his  views,  and  desiring,  above  all  controversial 
victories,  to  inculcate  a  genuine  love  of  Christ  and  moral 
purity  as  the  only  essential  requisites  for  salvation. 

His  later  contemporary  Hermog'enes,  against  whom  Ter- 
tullian wrote  one  of  his  most  brilliant  pamphlets,  is  said  to 
have  been  by  j)rofession  a  painter  and  to  have  resided  at 
Carthage  (circ.  170-210).  In  his  case  the  bias  of  Greek 
philosophy  predominated  over  that  of  Orientalism.  His  most 
important  deviation  from  orthodox  teaching  was  the  thorough- 
going application  he  made  of  the  tenet  of  the  eternity  of 
matter.  He  was  much  occupied  in  contesting  the  spread  of 
Montanism,  the  ascetic  pietism  of  which  was  highly  repug- 
nant to  his  Hellenic  fastidiousness.  He  also  combated  the 
emanation  theories  of  the  Gnostics,  on  the  ground  that  if  the 
human  soul,  through  however  many  successive  departures, 
originated  ultimately  from  God,  the  fact  of  man's  sinfulness 
could  not  be  satisfactorily  explained.  He  was  careful,  how- 
ever, to  guard  himself  against  the  popular  Platonic  doctrine 
that  evil  is  necessary  as  a  foil  to  good,  thus  betraying  a 


MARCION  AND   HIS   SCHOOL.  241 

certain  indebtedness  to  the  Christian  principle.  Tertnllian 
calls  him  a  Stoic;  but  no  doubt  his  philosophy  was  a  syncretic 
compound  of  many  diverse  systems.  He  endeavoured  to 
account  for  the  existing  state  of  the  universe  by  supposing 
that  God's  creative  power  is  conditioned  by  an  inorganic  matter 
which  is  equally  eternal  with  Himself.  This  matter  was  in 
a  chaotic  ferment,  over  which  the  Deity  had  from  all  eternity 
exercised  a  creative  attraction,  analogous  to  the  influence  of 
the  magnet,  or  of  beauty,^  by  which  the  mere  presence  of 
Godhead  tends  to  give  form  to  the  formless  and  life  to  the 
lifeless.  Thus  creation  was  eternal  and  yet  progressive ; 
while  the  opposition  of  matter  to  the  creative  attraction  was 
also  eternal,  and  in  this  consists  the  origin  of  all  imperfec- 
tion, including  moral  evil.  It  was  from  the  controversy  with 
him  as  well  as  with  the  earlier  Gnostics  that  Irenseus  and 
Tertullian  successfully  established  the  doctrine  of  a  creation 
out  of  nothing,  which  is  by  no  means  clearly  expressed, 
though  it  is  undoubtedly  implied,  in  Scripture. 

1  Compare  the  Aristotelian  conception  of  the  relation  of  the  Supreme 
Good  to  the  phenomenal  Universe,  "  Ktuei  ws  ipihiievov  :  "  "  He  influences  it 
as  the  beloved  object  influences  the  lover." 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE  EARLY  UNITARIAN  TEACHERS. 

We  have  given  the  above  title  to  our  chapter  in  order  to 
bring  before  our  readers  in  as  simple  a  form  as  possible  the 
controversy  we  now  propose  to  treat.  The  word  Unitarian  is  of 
comparatively  recent  origin,  and  is  opposed  to  Trinitarianism : 
<and  the  Trinitarian  doctrine  was  not  precisely  formulated 
until  some  time  after  the  close  of  our  period.  The  term  used 
by  these  teachers  to  describe  themselves  was  Monarchian, 
or  believers  in  the  essential  oneness  of  Deity. ^  Yet  this 
term  was  really  inadequate  and  misleading ;  inadequate,  since 
it  included  very  different  forms  of  doctrine,  and  misleading, 
since  it  was  equally  applicable,  in  a  modified  sense,  to  the 
orthodox  creed.-  Hence,  although  the  term  Unitarian  as 
applied  to  these  early  writers  is  an  anachronism,  yet,  essenti- 
ally, it  better  expresses  their  dogmatic  position  than  the  name 
they  gave  themselves. 

Our  plan  will  not  require  us  to  criticise  on  orthodox 
grounds  the  difficulties  of  the  Unitarian  view,  but  only  to 
bring  out  its  distinctive  characteristics,  and  to  show  how 
divergent  were  the  two  main  channels  in  which  it  flowed. 
These  may  be  named  after  their  two  most  celebrated  ex- 
ponents, the  Paulianist  and  Sabellian,  the  former  having 
more  affinity  with  the  Deistic  tendencies  of  later  Judaism,  the 
latter  being  connected  with  the  purely  metaphysical  theology 

^  From  /xouos,  single,  and  apxv,  source  (of  Godhead) ;  implying  that  those 
who  held  it  admitted  but  one  original  source  of  Deity,  denying  consub- 
stantiality  or  personality  to  other  Divine  essences. 

-  The  Church  held  the  Father  to  be  the  irrjyr]  deoTTjTos ;  the  deity  of  the 
Son  and  Spirit,  though  consubstantial,  being  derivative.  See,  on  the  ques- 
tion of  Orthodox  Monarchian  ism,  the  note  on  ]>.  439  of  vol.  ii.  of  Neander's 
<;hurch  History  (Bohn's  edition). 

242 


THE  EARLY  UNITARIAN  TEACHERS.  243 

of  the  Greek  schools.  Both  claimed  to  be  Christian,  but  both 
were  at  once  rejected  by  the  common  Christian  consciousness 
as  subversive  of  the  faith.  Their  history,  as  imperfect, 
unsuccessful  tentatives  of  development,  extends  over  a  con- 
siderable 2^eriod.  But  the  student  is  invited  to  consider 
them  all  together,  and  at  the  present  stage  of  our  subject. 
He  will  thus  be  in  a  position  to  give  his  subsequent  atten- 
tion to  the  main  stream  of  Church  literature,  undiverted  by 
allusions  to  doctrinal  difficulties  or  disputes. 

The  two  embodiments  of  the  Unitarian  idea  arose  in  dif- 
ferent ways.  The  first  originated  in  a  zeal  for  the  Divine 
Unity  as  the  exclusive  basis  of  Biblical  revelation.  It  held 
that  the  Church's  system  did  not  sufficiently  mark  the  differ- 
ence between  Christ  and  the  only  true  God.  It  therefore 
emphasised  His  humanity,  and  finally  denied  in  any  real  sense 
His  Divine  Nature.  The  second  arose  from  a  zeal  for  the  true 
Godhead  of  Christ,  which  seemed  to  be  impaired  by  the 
Church's  doctrine  of  a  Logos  distinct  from  and  subordinate 
to  the  Father.  This  theory  tended  to  recognise  in  Christ 
only  the  one  undivided  God,  and  to  regard  the  titles  Father, 
Son  and  Spirit  as  mere  modal  designations  of  the  same 
absolute  Being. 

It  is  evident  that  we  have  here  two  divergent  and  even 
contradictory  forms  of  teaching,  the  one  verging  on  Deism, 
the  other  tending  to  Pantheism.  And  in  fact  we  find  that 
on  more  than  one  occasion  they  were  more  violently  opposed 
to  each  other  than  they  were  to  the  Church. 

The  earliest  traces  of  the  first  form  ap^^ear  in  an  obscure 
sect  called  Alog"!,  from  their  denial  of  the  Logos  doctrine  of 
S.  John.  They  existed  in  Asia  Minor  during  the  prevalence 
of  the  Montanist  New  Prophecy,  to  which  they  offered  a 
fierce  resistance,  but  seem  to  have  had  little  influence  beyond 
that  sphere.  It  was  in  Rome  that  the  first  systematic 
Monarch ian  theory  was  broached.  Its  founder  was  one 
Theodotus,  a  leather-dresser  from  Byzantium,  who  attracted 
notice  about  the  end  of  the  second  century.  He  did  not 
question  the  supernatural  birth  of  Christ,  but  he  denied  the 
indwelling  Deity,   and  regarded  Him   as  influenced  by  the 


244  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

Holy  Spirit  in  the  same  way  as,  though  in  a  higher  degree 
than,  other  saints.  He  is  said  to  have  been  excommunicated 
by  Victor,  but  he  had  already  formed  a  school,  consisting 
mostly  of  dry  mechanical  logicians,  who  treated  theology  like 
a  mathematical  problem. ^  One  man,  however,  came  over  to 
him  of  a  different  stamp,  the  saintly  confessor  Natalis ;  but 
we  are  told  that  before  his  death  he  returned  to  the  Orthodox 
faith. 

Of  somewhat  greater  importance  is  the  name  of  Artemon, 
who  followed  a  more  decidedly  rationalistic  course.  Against 
his  heresy  the  work  known  as  the  "  Little  Labyrinth,"  ascribed 
to  both  Caius  and  Hippolytus,  was  directed.-  He  also  ad- 
mitted Christ's  supernatural  birth,  but  held  that  His  union 
with  the  Father  was  moral  only.  In  the  twenty-eighth 
chapter  of  his  fifth  book  Eusebius  gives  an  account  of  these 
theories,  and  quotes  an  anonymous  author,  probably  Caius, 
for  their  refutation.  The  main  interest  of  his  •  discussion 
turns  on  the  question  whether  this  heresy  found  favour  with 
the  bishops  of  the  Roman  Church.  Artemon's  most  telling- 
argument  was  that  his  views  were  substantially  those  of  all 
the  Roman  bishops  until  Victor,  whose  successor  Zephyrinus 
first  formulated  the  Catholic  theory,  thereby,  according  to 
Artemon,  corrupting  the  simplicity  of  the  faith.  The  writer 
quoted  by  Eusebius  indignantly  repudiates  this  allegation. 
He  quotes  a  long  list  of  Fathers,  from  Justin  downwards, 
who  had  affirmed  in  unmistakable  terms  the  true  deity  of 
Christ,  and  alludes  to  some  very  early  hymns,  composed  in  the 
sub-apostolic  age,  in  which  this  doctrine  was  evidently  set 
forth.  Unfortunately  this  passing  allusion,  though  confirmed 
by  the  celebrated  testimony  of  Pliny,  that  the  Christians  sang 
hymns  to  Christ  as  God,  is  insufficient  to  enable  us  to  de- 
termine exactly  the  dogmatic  import  of  these  verses.  The 
researches  of  Neander,  Lightfoot  and  others  have,  however, 

^  Asclepiades,  Hermophilus,  and  Apollonides  ;  and  perhaps  his  own  son, 
the  younger  Theodotus,  though  this  writer  seems  to  have  had  affinities 
with  the  Gnostics,  and  with  the  little  known  sect  of  the  Melchizedekians, 
who  imagined  a  mystic  connection  between  Christ  and  the  Captain  of  the 
ang-elic  armv.  -  See  Book  iii.  ch.  lo. 


THE  EARLY  UNITARIAN  TEACHERS.  245 

abundantly  disproved  the  hypothesis  of  Baur  in  support 
of  Artemon's  view,  and  have  vindicated  the  Early  Roman 
Church  from  any  taint  of  Ebionism,  whether  open,  or  veiled 
under  the  guise  of  Monarchianism. 

At  the  same  time  we  must  admit  the  probability  that 
Callistus,  who  succeeded  Zephyrinus  in  the  Papacy,  did 
really  for  a  time  either  accept  Artemon's  views  or  profess  to 
accept  them.  His  unscrupulous  character,  combined  with 
his  complete  ignorance  of  theology,  made  him  ready  to 
coquet  with  any  party  that  appeared  likely  to  help  him  in 
his  ambitious  plans.  But  Hippolytus  opened  upon  him  the 
battery  of  his  powerful  arguments  and  biting  satire.  Callistus 
was  greater  at  abuse  than  at  discussion.  By  way  of  reply, 
he  tried  to  fasten  on  his  opponent  the  opprobrious  epithet  of 
Ditheist.  The  Roman  Church  followed  Hippolytus.  It  held 
none  the  less  firmly  because  as  yet  only  implicitly,  the  Trini- 
tarian form  of  belief ;  and  the  uniformity  of  its  teaching  from 
the  apostolic  age  onwards,  forms  the  great  practical  test  of 
Orthodoxy  both  for  Iren^eus  and  for  TertuUian. 

Another  example  of  this  form  of  Monarchianism  isBeryllus, 
Bishop  of  Bostra  in  Arabia,  whose  doctrines  are  briefly  and 
obscurely  described  by  Eusebius.  His  theology  seems  to 
have  affected  only  the  Person  of  Christ,  and  to  have  made 
no  pronouncement  on  the  Nature  of  God.  He  taught  that 
Christ  only  arrived  at  distinct  personal  consciousness  by  His 
human  birth.  That  ante-mundane  participation  in  the 
Father's  glory,  of  which  S.  John's  Gospel  speaks,  Beryllus 
interprets  not  of  self-conscious  personality,  but  of  an  ideal 
existence  in  the  Thought  of  God  anterior  to  any  outward 
manifestation.  When  these  opinions  became  known,  the 
situation  was  considered  so  grave  that  a  synod  was  convened 
to  sift  the  whole  question.  In  order  the  more  effectually 
to  confute  Beryllus,  Origen  was  summoned  from  Csesarea 
Stratonis.  We  learn  from  Eusebius  that  this  Father,  by 
his  learning,  skill  and  moderation,  succeeded  in  convincing 
Beryllus  of  his  error  (a.d.  244).  The  latter  addressed  a 
letter  to  Origen,  in  which  he  admitted  his  fault,  and  promised 
to  abstain  from  such  teaching  for  the  future.     This  is  one  of 


246  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

those  rare  instances  in  which  theological  discussion,  carried 
on  without  theological  bitterness,  has  led  to  union  instead  of 
discord.  It  is  to  Origen  and  his  followers  alone  that  we  can 
look  for  examples  of  this  sweet  reasonableness,  so  much  more 
precious  than  ability,  so  much  more  persuasive  than  anathema. 

Paul  of  Samosata. 

At  a  later  date,  and  in  a  different  part  of  the  world,  the 
teaching  of  Artemon  was  revived  by  the  well-known  Paul  of 
Samosata,  Bishop  of  Antioch.  He  belongs  to  the  later  half 
of  the  third  century  ;  but,  as  we  shall  not  recur  to  this  subject, 
we  propose  to  give,  for  the  sake  of  completeness,  a  short 
account  of  Lis  views. 

To  the  historian  he  is  a  highly  interesting  personage. 
Endowed  with  a  striking  presence,  commanding  personal 
ability,  and  an  inordinate  love  of  pre-eminence,  he  threw 
himself  with  vigour  into  the  secular  and  religious  life  of 
Antioch,  and  soon  became  not  merely  its  chief  ecclesiastical 
officer,  but  its  most  prominent  and  powerful  citizen.  Zenobia, 
Queen  of  Palmyra,  who  was  known  to  favour  the  Jewish 
faith,  gave  him  her  patronage  and  protection.  He  used 
her  influence  to  acquire  the  lucrative  civil  appointment  of 
Ducenarius,  or  collector  of  revenue,  thus  affording  the  first 
instance  of  combined  spiritual  and  temporal  authority.  He 
filled  his  double  position  with  offensive  arrogance.  He 
claimed  a  general  jurisdiction  over  all  the  Christian  popula- 
tion, citing  them  before  his  civil  tribunal,  and  assessing 
their  judicial  penalties.  His  ambition  was  equalled  by  his 
avarice,  and  both  by  his  vanity.  Large  sums  of  money 
flowed  into  his  coffers,  which  he  expended  in  a  display  of 
magnificence  as  unsuitable  to  a  Christian  Father  in  God  as 
absurd  in  the  representative  of  an  officially  proscribed  religion. 
The  society  of  Antioch  was  frivolous,  refined,  and  dissolute. 
The  bishop's  morals  did  not  escape  suspicion.  His  assemblies 
were  thronged  with  ladies  of  fashion,  among  whom  the  courtier 
prelate  moved  with  graceful  assurance,  inhaling  the  sweet 
incense  of  flattery  from  voluptuous  lips.    He  resembled  much 


THE  EARLY  UNITARIAN   TEACHERS.  247 

more  the  ambitious  and  corrupt  ecclesiastics  of  the  Byzantine 
court  than  any  prelate  of  whom  the  Church  had  as  yet  had 
experience.  Belying  on  the  countenance  of  the  queen,  he 
strove  to  force  his  doctrines  on  the  churches  of  the  neigh- 
bourhood. These  silently  resented  a  despotism  they  dared 
not  resist. 

His  doctrines  were  those  of  Artemon  pushed  to  their  logical 
issue.  He  admitted  no  distinction  of  Persons  in  the  God- 
head. The  Logos  he  explained  to  be  merely  the  self-con- 
sciousness of  God,  analogous  to  the  spirit  of  man,  and  in  no 
sense  a  separate  personality.  Man  might  in  this  sense  be 
truly  said  to  be  made  in  God's  image,  but  not,  even  in  the 
case  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  partake  of  God's  Nature.  Paul  did 
not,  however,  reduce  the  Divinity  of  Messiah  to  a  purely 
psychological  resemblance  to  God.  He  admitted  a  positive 
action  of  the  Word  on  Jesus,  but  not  so  as  to  imply  any 
union  of  essence.  Jesus  was  indeed  born  of  a  virgin,^  but 
in  other  respects  was  a  man  like  ourselves,  who  had  succeeded 
in  realising  human  perfection,  and  in  attaining  by  merit  the 
fulness  of  grace.  The  Divine  Word  might  be  said  to  animate 
Him,  but  was  not  incarnate  in  Him.  Thus  the  difference  be- 
tween Jesus  and  other  men  was  relative,  not  absolute.  He 
gained  the  title  of  Son  of  God  by  His  holiness,  though  it 
might  also  be  affirmed  of  Him  in  a  certain  sense  from  the 
time  of  His  birth.  Paul  denied  any  possibility  of  union, 
except  that  of  will,  between  the  human  and  divine.  In  this 
metaphorical  sense  Christ  was  one  with  the  Father ;  and  Paul 
maintained  that  such  union  was  superior  to  that  of  nature,  for 
this  would  leave  no  scope  for  the  exercise  of  moral  freedom. 
The  Holy  Spirit,  he  said,  dwelt  in  Christ  in  the  same  manner 
as  a  god  dwells  in  his  temple. 

The  reader  will  observe  that  Paul's  theological  standpoint 
is,  like  that  of  the  later  Jews,  in  reality  Deism.  He  fixes  an 
infinite  and  impassable  gulf  between  the  Creator  and  the 
Creation.      Moreover,   he   substitutes  an   apotheosis  for  an 

1  It  has  been  doubted  whether  Paul  held  this,  but  as  Eaur  and  Neander, 
from  different  points  of  view,  both  admit  that  he  did,  it  seems  best  to 
accept  it. 


248  THE  HERETICAL  SECTS. 

incarnation,  after  the  manner  of  heathenism,  and  looks  upon 
our  Lord  as  virtually  the  ideal  man,  a  sort  of  conception 
which  the  Stoic  imagination  had  created. 

His  views  were  instinctively  and  at  once  repudiated.  The 
clergy  under  him  almost  to  a  man  appealed  against  his  teach- 
ing. The  Eastern  bishops,  headed  by  Firmilian  of  Cappa- 
docia,  met  in  synod  to  sit  in  judgment  on  their  metropolitan 
(a.d.  264).  He  was  asked  to  state  his  views.  This,  however, 
he  had  no  intention  of  doing.  He  protested  vaguely  that  he 
taught  in  conformity  with  the  Apostles,  and  was  willing  to 
accept  the  definitions  prescribed  by  orthodoxy.  His  versatility 
and  command  of  evasive  language  prevailed  over  the  suspicions 
of  judges  unskilled  in  metajDhysics  or  rhetoric,  and  he  was 
permitted  to  continue  in  his  office,  greatly  to  the  disgust  of 
those  who  knew  him  best.  On  a  second  occasion,  two  years 
afterwards,  a  conference  was  held,  in  which  counsel  and  ex- 
hortation were  employed,  but  with  no  effect  beyond  a  renewal 
of  vain  and  delusive  promises.  At  last  his  misgovernment 
as  well  as  false  teaching  became  intolerable.  A  thorough  in- 
vestigation was  demanded.  A  council  met,  which  in  learning 
and  piety,  though  not  in  numbers,  may  rank  with  the  most 
illustrious  synods  of  the  Church  (a.d.  270).  In  this  assembly 
Paul  at  length  met  his  match.  A  presbyter  named  Malchion, 
who  was  or  had  been  a  rhetorician,  and  therefore  understood 
the  artifices  of  Paul's  controversial  method,  was  able  by  his 
pressing  logic  to  pin  him  to  certain  flagrantly  heretical  ad- 
missions.^ On  which,  brought  at  length  to  bay,  he  boldly 
announced  his  system,  which  was  a  virtual  confession  of  guilt. 

He  was  called  upon  to  retract ;  and  on  refusing  was  ex- 
communicated, de230sed,  and  a  successor  appointed.  It 
was  one  thing,  however,  to  pronounce  his  deposition,  another 
thing  to  compel  him  to  vacate  the  chair.  Kelying  on  his 
popularity  and  the  good  offices  of  Zenobia,  he  set  the  decree 
at  defiance,  and  remained  ostensibly  bishoj^  for  two  years 

^  A  curious  incident  in  this  council  was  the  objection  raised  bj-  Paul  to 
the  term  ofMoovaLos,  co-essential,  as  defining  the  relation  of  the  Son  to  the 
Father,  and  the  allowance  of  his  objection  by  the  council.  The  term  was 
abandoned,  and  this  abandonment  ])roved  the  cause  of  much  trouble  to 
Athanasius  when  striving  to  reintroduce  the  term. 


THE  EARLY  UNITARIAN   TEACHERS.  249 

longer.  But  on  the  overthrow  of  Zeuobia  by  Aurelian,  the 
bishops  called  in  the  Emperor's  authority,  thereby  giving 
the  first  instance  of  an  example  often  followed  since  with 
disastrous  consequences,  of  appealing  to  the  intervention  of 
the  temporal  power.  Aurelian  acted  with  great  considera- 
tion. He  referred  the  business  to  the  Eoman  bishop  and  his 
Italian  colleagues  ;  and,  in  accordance  with  their  decision,  en- 
forced the  ejectment  of  Paul.  The  deposed  prelate  founded 
a  sect  known  as  Paulianists,  who  lingered  on  in  steadily 
diminishing  numbers  for  more  than  a  century  and  a  half. 
In  the  19th  canon  of  the  Nicene  Council  their  baptism  and 
orders  are  disallowed,  on  the  ground  that,  notwithstanding 
their  possession  of  apostolical  succession,  their  denial  of  the 
Trinity  made  both  baptism  and  ordination  in  that  Name  a 
purely  nominal  function  devoid  of  meaning. ^ 

Praxeas  and  Noetus. 

We  now  pass  to  the  second  class  of  Monarchians,  who  pro- 
ceeded less  from  religious  than  from  metaphysical  premises, 
and  were  even  further  removed  from  the  true  Christian  doc- 
trine. They  all  came  from  the  East,  and  the  first  of  them 
is  Praxeas,  who  migrated  from  Asia  Minor  to  Eome  just 
when  the  Montanist  party  had  succeeded  in  gaining  the  ear 
of  the  Pope.  This  Pope  was  probably  Eleutherus  (a.d.  185). 
Praxeas  set  forth  strongly  the  weak  points  of  Montanism, 
and  induced  the  Pope  to  withdraw  his  support  from  it.^ 
Hippolytus,  however,  whose  information  on  this  topic  is  full 
and  accurate,  mentions  many  names  of  Monarchian  leaders, 
but  never  once  that  of  Praxeas.  This  has  led  to  the  supposi- 
tion that  Praxeas  was  a  nickname  either  given  to  him  or 
assumed  by  him,  and  mistaken  by  Tertullian  for  his  real  name. 
There  is  a  story  that  he  had  been  a  confessor.  At  any  rate 
his  influence  with  the  Roman  Church  was  very  great.  His 
doctrine  was  Unitarian  in  the  strictest  sense,  and  is  called  by 

^  On  the  question  of  heretical  opinion  as  invalidating  baptism,  see  the 
chapter  on  Cyprian. 

-  Neander  says  to  excommunicate  it.  If  so,  the  Pope  in  question  must 
have  been  Victor. 


250  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

Tertullian  Fatripassian}  He  denied  any  essential  triplicity 
in  the  Godhead.  The  Most  High  became  incarnate  in  Christ 
by  an  act  of  sovereign  will.  In  Jesus  the  Divine  part  is 
God  the  Father,  the  flesh  is  the  Son.  This  view  reduces  the 
humanity  to  a  mere  semblance,  the  corporal  envelope  of  the 
Divine  Spirit,  which  is  at  the  same  time  the  Word  and  the 
Father.  Victor  and  Zephyrinus  may  possibly  have  accepted 
his  language  without  understanding  his  views.  He  left  Rome 
for  Carthage  apparently  with  good  credentials  of  orthodoxy. 
But  he  found  there  a  controversialist  of  a  very  different  stamp 
from  those  of  Eome.  It  was  in  vain  to  palm  upon  Tertullian 
plausible  speculations  of  ontology.  He  struck  directly  at  the 
practical  issue,  and  by  his  penetrating  logic  soon  convicted 
Praxeas  of  unsoundness.  The  date  of  his  treatise  Against 
Praxeas  is  variously  given  as  A.D.  206.  210,  and  222. 

Another  name  of  mark  is  that  of  Noetus  of  Smyrna,  who 
appeared  at  Eome  soon  after  Praxeas  had  left  it  (a.D.  202), 
and  somewhat  developed  his  doctrine.  According  to  him. 
the  One  God  determined  to  go  forth  from  the  absolute  mode 
of  existence  and  to  assume  the  relative.  Christ  is  therefore  at 
once  Son  and  Father,  according  to  these  two  phases  or  modes. 
Thus  he  explained  the  Theophanies  of  the  Old  Testament, 
the  Father  appearing  as  Son  to  the  patriarchs.  The  Son 
does  not  proceed  from  the  Father :  He  is  as  it  were  an  im- 
perfect presentation  of  the  Father  adapted  to  mortal  appre- 
hension. Thus  Christ  was  the  Son  during  His  terrestrial 
career ;  yet  discerning  spirits  could  even  then  behold  the 
Godhead  of  the  Father  in  Him.  This  doctrine  appears  to 
safeguard  the  freedom  of  the  Divine  agency.  But  it  comes 
perilously  near  to  Pantheism,  and  to  a  theory  of  successive 
incarnations.  Epiphanius  asserts  that  he  taught  the  trans- 
migration of  souls.  He  seems  to  have  regarded  Jesus  as  the 
type -product  of  humanity,  His  personality  being  one  of  the 
masks  which  the  Author  of  Being  assumes  for  a  time  in  the 
long  drama  of  self-manifestation. 

1  I.e.,  that  when  Christ  died  upon  the  cross,  it  was  God  the  Father  who 
suffered  in  Him.  This  title,  which  is  more  creditable  to  Tertullian's  in- 
genuity than  to  his  scrupulousness,  was  not  really  merited  by  Praxeas. 


THE  EARLY   UNITARIAN   TEACHERS.  251 

The  varying  relations  of  Noetus  to  Zephyrinus  and  Callis- 
tus  are  described  in  the  pages  of  Hippolytus.  There  seems 
no  reason  to  doubt  that  these  prelates  committed  themselves 
to  a  form  of  Unitarian  doctrine.  The  Roman  clergy  were 
never  strong  in  theology.  Callistns  made  no  difficulty  about 
condemning  the  very  men  on  whose  shoulders  he  had  mounted, 
so  little  was  his  mind  impressed  with  any  speculative  bias. 
The  Church  resumed  its  orthodox  level,  and  Noetus  dis- 
appeared. 

Sabellius. 

By  far  the  most  eminent  of  the  Patripassians  or  Monar- 
chians  was  Sabellius  of  Libya.  If  Paul  foreshadowed  Arius 
in  importance,  Sabellius  was  the  precursor  of  Pelagius.  In 
one  respect  Sabellius  was  in  advance  of  the  entire  Church,  viz., 
in  his  precise  application  of  the  three  names.  Father,  Son  and 
Spirit,  to  express  co-ordinate  relations.  We  find  the  formula 
first  in  S.  Matthew's  Gospel,  and  but  little  later  in  the  asser- 
tion by  Simon  Magus  that  he  had  appeared  as  the  Father 
to  Samaritans,  as  the  Son  to  Jews,  and  as  the  Holy  Ghost 
to  Gentiles.  In  each  of  these  a  co-ordination  of  relations 
ap23ears,  but  is  left  indefinite.  In  the  definite  theology  of 
the  early  Church  the  subordination  of  the  Son  to  the  Father 
in  dignity  is  more  dwelt  on  than  His  co-ordination  in  respect 
of  essence  ;  while  the  inclusion  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  such  co- 
ordination is  only  worked  out  in  the  most  rudimentary  manner. 
Justin,  for  example,  seems  to  waver  between  ascribing  true 
Godhead  to  the  Spirit,  and  depicting  Him  as  an  angelic  nature 
created  by  God.  Now  to  Sabellius  belongs  the  logical  merit  of 
bringing  to  the  front  this  conception  of  a  co-ordinate  tripli- 
city.  We  say  logical  rather  than  theological,  because  Sabellius 
really  gave  to  his  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  no  more  than  a 
logical  value.  Over  and  above  the  threefold  manifestation 
of  Godhead  and  far  behind  it  lay  in  his  eyes  the  absolute 
incommunicable  essence,  the  Monad  ;  and  the  Trinity  merely 
denoted  the  different  relations  of  the  self-evolving  monad  to 
the  creation.  His  language,  however,  was  not  always  con- 
sistent.    At  times  he  identified  the  Father  with  the  Monad, 


252  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

and  so  could  say,  '•  The  Father  remains  the  same,  but  evolves 
Himself  in  the  Son  and  Spirit."  This  is  the  cardinal  dis- 
tinction between  Sabellius  and  the  other  Monarchians,  that 
he  received  the  whole  Trinity,  and,  with  the  rest,  the  doctrine 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  into  his  Unitarian  theory. 

It  should  always  be  remembered  that  to  Sabellius  the 
Trinity  does  not  mean  the  same  thing  as  to  an  orthodox 
churchman.  A  characteristic  of  his  system  lies  in  his  using 
the  established  language  of  Christendom  in  a  new  sense. 
This  gives  an  appearance  of  obscurity  to  his  ideas  which  does 
not  really  belong  to  them. 

With  regard  to  the  Person  of  Christ,  he  held  that  the 
Divine  power  of  the  Logos  appropriated  to  itself  a  human 
body,  and  begat  by  this  appropriation  the  Person  of  Christ. 
In  himself  the  Logos  was  only  Logos  ;  it  was  by  his  humani- 
sation  that  He  first  became  the  Son  of  God.  This  view  led 
Sabellius  to  regard  Christ's  personality  as  only  a  transitory 
manifestation.  In  the  final  end,  God  will  resume  into  Him- 
self the  power  of  the  Logos,  which  has  been  thrown  forth 
as  a  self-subsistent  personal  existence,  and  this  personal 
existence  will  thereby  be  annihilated.  The  ultimate  resump- 
tion of  all  difference  into  absolute  unity  is  the  goal  of  his 
system.  It  merges  by  insensible  gradations  into  Pantheism, 
though  of  a  logical  and  metaphysical,  not  of  a  cosmological 
or  physical  type. 


Summary  of  Heretical  Teaching*. 

We  have  now  traced  the  outlines  of  the  three  great  types 
of  heresy  which  distracted  the  Ante-Xicene  Church,  together 
with  some  of  their  combinations.  We  have  shown  that  they 
proceeded  from  three  main  sources — (i)  Judaism,  pure  or 
mixed  ;  (2)  Oriental  or  corrupted  Platonism,  including  a  mass 
of  doctrines  from  the  remotest  regions  imperfectly  fused  to- 
gether ;  and  (3)  the  dialectical  apparatus  of  Greek  philosophy, 
playing  upon  conceptions  at  bottom  Judaic  or  Pantheistic. 

The  first  of  these  produced  the  Ebionite  form  of  Christianity, 
the  second  the  Gnostic,  the  third  the  Unitarian.     These  three 


THE  EARLY  UNITARIAN   TEACHERS.  253 

forms  liave  died  out  so  far  as  their  outward  presentation  is 
concerned,  but  their  spirit  is  by  no  means  dead.  In  the 
seething  ferment  of  opinions  at  the  present  da^^,  it  is  not 
difficult  to  perceive  the  analogues  of  each  of  them.  Ebionism 
is  reviving  under  the  guise  of  Biblical  theology,  which  seeks 
to  restrict  the  genuine  Christian  dogma  to  that  form  of  it 
which  historical  criticism  educes  from  the  New  Testament. 
The  brilliant  and  suggestive  works  of  Matthew  Arnold  are 
the  best  known  exponents  of  this  line  of  thought,  whereby 
the  Person  of  Christ  is  reduced  to  nearly  human  dimensions, 
and  the  miraculous  element  in  it  classed  as  ciberglauhc.  Uni- 
tarianism,  as  the  name  implies,  still  holds  its  ground  ;  and 
in  the  works  of  Martineau  and  others,  rises  to  a  lofty  height 
of  spirituality,  far  transcending  the  metaphysical  restrictions 
on  which  the  system  is  logically  based.  But  it  is  Gnosticism, 
the  hydra-headed,  the  Protean,  that  looms  highest  on  the 
horizon,  and  once  more  darkens  it  by  its  huge  but  shapeless 
bulk.  We  are  not  alluding  to  the  current  supernaturalism  of  a 
magical  or  theurgic  character,  which  in  divers  forms  is  never- 
theless making  way  both  in  Roman  Catholic  and  Protes- 
tant countries.  We  speak  here  only  of  its  intellectual  aspect, 
which  in  the  twofold  sense  of  a  theosophy  and  a  science  is 
manifestly  reappearing  among  mankind.  As  a  theosophy, 
Gnosticism  rests  upon  the  faculty  of  spiritual  intuition  among 
those  favoured  souls  who,  by  discipline  or  natural  insight, 
are  enabled  to  transcend  the  physical  sphere  and  penetrate 
the  mechanism  of  the  unseen  universe.  The  recent  influx  of 
Oriental  ideas  and  systems  into  the  higher  culture  of  Europe 
has  undoubtedly  opened  a  path  of  development  of  which  at 
present  we  see  only  the  beginning.  As  a  vast  syncretistic 
edifice  of  religious  thought,  Gnosticism  is  even  more  dis- 
tinctly reappearing,  though  in  place  of  the  cosmogonical 
structures  of  the  old  Gnostics  we  meet  with  a  comparative 
survey  of  the  religious  ideas  of  humanity  founded  on  the 
method  of  science,  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  critical 
philosophy  introduced  by  Kant.  The  science  of  religions  has 
not  yet  proceeded  far  enough  in  its  synthesis  to  evolve  the 
conception  of  a  universal  religion.     But  unless  the  human 


254  THE   HERETICAL  SECTS. 

mind  is  to  rest  content  with  the  dogmatic  non  2J0SSU'}mis  of 
Agnosticism,  which  is  a  highly  improbable  result,  we  may 
ex|3ect  to  see  in  the  not  distant  future  a  vast  religious 
structure  essentially  corresjDonding  to  the  great  systems  of 
Basilides  and  Valentinus,  transcending  them  indeed  in  the 
soundness  of  its  metaphysical  basis,  and  in  the  purity  of 
its  method,  but  equally  with  them  including  the  Christian 
revelation  as  one  of  many  elements  to  be  absorbed  in  its 
comprehensive  scheme. 

Meanwhile  the  dogmatic  system  of  Christianity  itself  will 
have  before  it  the  task  of  proving  its  adaptability  not  only 
to  the  scientific  consciousness  of  the  western  world,  but  also 
to  the  widely  different  modes  of  religious  thought  that  have 
prevailed  immemorially  in  the  East.  The  Hellenic  mode  of 
jDresenting  Christian  dogma  which  has  exclusively  prevailed 
during  the  long  interval  since  Justin  Martyr  first  undertook 
it,  may  possibly  be  awaiting  a  new  phase  of  development  more 
nearly  approaching  universality.  We  have  remarked  in  our 
introductory  essay  that,  so  far  as  the  world  has  already  re- 
ceived Christianity,  no  other  mode  of  connecting  it  with  man's 
primary  intuitions  of  the  metaphysical  order  has  been  avail- 
able ;  and  that  the  Greek  intellect  alone  has  hitherto  supplied 
an  expression  for  these  which  could  fairly  be  called  universal. 
But  it  remains  to  be  seen  how  far  the  necessity  for  stating 
Christian  dogma  in  a  way  intelligible  to  the  metaphysical 
systems  of  China,  India  and  Japan,  may  involve  a  recon- 
sideration of  its  ontological  aspects.  In  any  case  it  must 
become  increasingly  clear  that  the  Person  of  Jesus  Christ 
in  the  future,  as  in  the  distant  past,  will  be  the  centre  round 
which  the  whole  problem  will  revolve.  And  as  we  read  the 
record  of  these  ancient  systems  and  ponder  on  their  fate, 
we,  who  accept  Jesus  Christ  as  the  one  perfect  manifestation 
of  Deity  in  the  human  S23here,  and  recognise  His  unique  and 
transcendent  power  over  mankind,  cannot  doubt  that  the 
Spirit  of  God  will  again  move  over  the  face  of  the  waters 
and  educe  from  their  turbid  mixture  the  ray  of  eternal 
light. 


BOOK  III. 

THE    APOLOGISTS. 
(a.d.  130-250.) 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  APOLOGETIC  LITERATURE. 

I.  General  Eemarks  on  the  Subject. 

The  environment  in  which  the  Christian  faith  had  to  work 
out  its  destiny  was  a  highly  complex  one.  Under  an  ex- 
ternal uniformity,  due  to  the  strong  hand  of  Rome,  there 
heaved  a  multitudinous  sea  of  passions,  prejudices  and  faiths. 

These,  though  divided  by  profound  mutual  antipathies, 
could  combine,  when  occasion  required,  to  withstand  the  new 
religion.  It  is  impossible,  within  the  limits  of  a  short  essay, 
to  do  more  than  single  out  those  particular  forces  which 
came  most  directly  into  collision  with  the  Church,  and  to 
indicate  the  manner  in  which  the  Church  confronted  them. 

There  are  four  such  forces  which  stand  out  conspicuous 
above  the  rest.  With  each  of  them,  separately  or  united,  the 
Church  had  to  reckon  ;  over  each  she  triumphed,  but  her 
triumph  was  not  gained  without  a  considerable  reaction  of 
the  conquered  principle  upon  herself. 

The  first  antagonistic  principle  was  Judaism,  from  whic^ 
Christianity  sprang ;  the  second  was  Philosophy,  or  the  effort  "^ 
of  the  human  spirit  to  win  its  own  way  to  truth ;  the  third 
was  Paganism,  by  which  we  are  to  understand  the  manifold 
religions  of  the  nations ;  the  fourth  was  the  attitude  of  the 
secular  power,  which  was  based  on  the  apotheosis  of  Caesar 
and  the  omnipotence  of  the  State.  We  propose  to  consider 
these  in  order. 

1.  The  Hostility  of  the  Jews. 

From  the  earliest  spread  of  Christianity  the  Jews  had 
been  among  its  most  implacable  foes.  Their  hostility  was 
twofold.     On  the  one  hand,  there  was  the  bitter  rivalry  of 

'''  R 


258  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

the  Synagogue,  that  is,  of  Judaism  proper ;  on  the  other,  the 
impracticable  obstinacy  of  the  Judgeo-Christians,  or  those 
who  had  embraced  Christianity  without  renouncing  the  Law. 
Both  assumed  at  the  outset  positions  from  which  they  never 
withdrew.  Already  in  the  New  Testament  this  is  clearly 
manifest.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  the  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians  give  the  key  to  all  the  subsequent  relations  of  the 
Church  and  the  Circumcision.  The  Jewish  position  was 
this:  "Whatever  else  may  be  accepted,  the  Mosaic  Law 
must  remain  untouched.  Circumcision  and  the  Sabbath  are 
not  abrogated  by  Christianity." 

The  unconverted  Jew  rejected  Christ,  the  converted  Jew 
accepted  Him,  but  both  held  equally  to  the  Law.  The  one 
insisted  on  its  permanence,  the  other  on  its  universality. 
The  dislike  of  the  Jews  to  Christians  of  their  own  blood  is 
witnessed  by  the  assertion  of  the  Roman  Synagogue  to 
S.  Paul,  "  As  concerning  this  sect,  we  know  that  everywhere 
it  is  spoken  against."  ^  But  this  dislike  had  not  yet  passed 
into  the  organised  propaganda  of  hostility  which  it  soon 
became.  For  "We  neither  received  letters  from  Judaea 
concerning  thee,  neither  any  of  the  brethren  that  came 
showed  or  spake  any  harm  concerning  thee."  ^  A  genera- 
tion later  such  language  would  have  been  impossible.  Justin 
(a.D.  145)  complains  that  in  every  city  where  there  was  a 
Jewish  Synagogue  emissaries  were  despatched  from  the  lead- 
ing Jewish  communities  to  prejudice  the  Christian  cause ; 
and  not  only  so,  but  in  every  outbreak  of  popular  fury  it 
was  the  Jews  who  goaded  the  people  to  madness,  the  Jews 
who  heaped  up  the  faggots  and  applied  the  first  torch  to 
the  stake.^  Their  own  terrible  sufferings,  instead  of  teaching 
them  pity,  served  only  to  inflame  their  hate,  and  none  gloated 
with  fiercer  joy  than  they  over  the  dying  agonies  of  the  martyr. 

It  is  true  there  were  Jews  of  a  very  different  stamp,  men 
of  whom  Philo  is  the  type,  who  had  drunk  at  the  well  of 
Greek  thought,  and,  while  remaining  loyal  to  their  faith,  had 

1  Acts  xxviii.  22.  -  Ibid.  v.  21. 

2  We  learn  this  from  the  account  of  Polycarp's  death,  akeady  referred 
to  in  the  chapter  on  Polycarp. 


THE  APOLOGETIC   LITERATURE.  259 

cast  aside  much  of  its  bigotry.  An  interesting  picture  of 
such  a  Jew  is  preserved  in  Justin's  celebrated  dialogue. 
Though  not  of  Alexandrian  but  probably  of  Ephesian  birth, 
the  grave  and  thoughtful  Trypho  shows  none  of  that  fierce 
spirit  of  condemnation  which  animates  some  of  his  fellow-dis- 
putants, but  listens  courteously  to  the  Christian  apologist  as 
he  handles  the  Old  Testament  evidences  for  the  Divinity  of 
Christ.  But,  benevolent  as  he  is,  he  cannot  comprehend  the 
offer  of  salvation  being  made  to  such  as  reject  the  ceremonial 
law.  This  prejudice  is  too  inveterate  to  be  outgrown.  The 
question  has  not  advanced  a  step  since  the  Council  of  Jeru- 
salem. If  anything,  it  has  gone  backward.  Trypho  does 
not  exactly  deny  the  possibility  of  salvation  to  a  Gentile 
believer  who  rejects  the  Law,  for  this  position  would  be  mani- 
festly untenable.  But,  with  regard  to  the  Christian  of  Jewish 
birth,  his  conviction  as  to  the  ever-binding  force  of  the  Law 
is  absolute. 

The  same  controversy  appears  in  the  Latin  Church  in 
Tertullian's  short  treatise,  "Against  the  Jews."^  In  this 
the  arguments  of  Justin  are  repeated,  though  with  less  ful- 
ness. In  these  and  all  other  writings  addressed  to  Jews,  the 
final  court  of  appeal  is  always  the  Old  Testament,  and,  to  the 
Christian  party  at  any  rate,  pre-eminently  the  prophetic 
books.  The  following  are  the  main  points  made  by  the 
apologists  against  their  Jewish  opponents,  and  on  them 
they  rest  their  case  : — 

1.  The  fact  that  the  Law  of  Sinai  is  a  temporary  dispen- 
sation, being  preceded  by  the  Law  of  Eden,  the  Noachic 
prece^ots,  and  the  covenant  of  promise  with  Abraham,  and 
being  followed  by  the  prophetic  announcement  of  a  new  law 
written  in  the  hearts  of  the  faithful. 

2.  The  prediction  of  Christ's  coming  in  humility  before 
His  final  and  glorious  Advent,  and  the  important  chrono- 
logical indications  thereof  in  the  Book  of  Daniel. 

3.  The  indications  throughout  the  Old  Testament  of  a 
j)lurality  of  Persons  in  the  Godhead,  and  the  fulfilment  of 
these  allusions  by  Jesus  Christ  and  by  Him  only. 

^  Adversus  Jud^eos. 


26o  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

4.  The  abrogation  of  the  claims  made  by  Israel  to  be  the 
exclusive  people  of  God,  and  the  incorporation  of  the  Gentile 
world  into  the  spiritual  Israel  or  Church  of  Christ. 

Many  other  matters  are  discussed,  and  many  other  proofs 
alleged ;  but  the  above  form  the  leading  topics  of  Christian 
apologetic  as  directed  against  Jewish  and  Judaising  writers.^ 

The  net  result  of  this  controversy  is  the  establishment  of 
certain  fixed  canons  of  Old  Testament  interpretation,  the 
germs  of  which  are  already  present  in  S.  Paul's  epistles,  and 
are  pursued  to  a  very  full  development  by  the  skill  of  succes- 
sive apologists.  Individual  writers  no  doubt  allow  their  fancy 
or  their  prejudice  to  carry  them  away,  as  when  Justin  sees 
the  Cross  in  almost  every  situation  in  the  Bible,  or  when 
Origen  sacrifices  grammar  and  history  for  his  favourite 
allegory;  but  the  main  principles  of  patristic  exegesis  are 
struck  out  by  the  long  conflict  with  Judaism,  and  after 
seventeen  centuries  remain  in  vogue  at  the  present  day  as 
a  striking  witness  to  the  ingenuity  and  thoroughness  with 
which  the  Old  Testament  was  studied. 

2.  The  Opposition  of  the  Philosophers. 

The  august  tradition  of  Greek  philosophy,  from  its  first  out- 
burst in  Ionia  in  the  seventh  century  B.C.  to  its  last  expiring 
effort  in  Alexandrian  Neo-Platonism,  offered  many  elements 
that  might  well  have  combined  with  Christianity,  had  there 
not  been  others,  still  more  influential,  which  repelled  it.  It 
will  be  worth  while  to  dwell  briefly  on  these  two  sets  of 
characteristics. 

No  one  will  do  injustice  to  Greek  philosophy  as  a  system 
of  reasoned  truth,  metaphysical  in  its  presuppositions,  dia- 
lectical in  its  method,  simply  aiming,  at  any  rate  in  its  best 

^  The  Fathers  were  at  a  disadvantage  when  ai'guing  with  Jews,  owing 
to  their  ignorance  of  Hebrew.  It  was  open  to  the  Jew  to  replr,  when 
pressed  with  a  convincing  text,  "The  passage  you  quote  is  not  in  the 
Hebrew."  The  Fathers,  stung  by  Jewish  taunts,  accused  the  Jews  of 
mutilating  the  Old  Testament  to  suppress  evidences  of  Christ's  Messiah- 
ship.  With  so  much  suspicion  on  both  sides,  it  would  be  hopeless  to 
expect  unprejudiced  discussion. 


THE  APOLOGETIC   LITERATURE.  261 

period,  at  understanding  that  which  is.  But  there  is  another 
aspect  of  philosophy,  not  quite  so  universally  appreciated,  but, 
from  our  present  point  of  view,  even  more  important.  We 
mean  its  religious  protest  against  the  falsehood  and  immor- 
ality of  polytheism,  and  its  distinct  assertion  of  the  Unity 
and  goodness  of  God.  A  parallel,  and  that  no  fanciful  one, 
might  be  drawn  between  the  philosophers  of  Greece  and  the 
prophets  of  Israel.  In  each  case  the  higher  teaching  was 
directed  against  prevailing  religious  ideas,  often  at  no  small 
risk  to  the  teacher.  In  each  case  the  main  element  of  that 
teaching  was  the  Unity  of  God,  though  the  Greek  conceived 
of  Him  as  Intelligence  or  Force,  the  Hebrew  as  a  Personal 
Creator.  1  In  each  case  the  superior  insight  of  the  thinker 
gave  him  influence  in  public  affairs,  and  governments  were 
guided  by  his  advice,  though  at  times  scarcely  understanding 
it.  In  each  case  that  which  began  as  a  spontaneous  inspira- 
tion degenerated  into  a  technical  discipline,  though  in  the 
case  of  prophecy  this  was  never  able  to  supersede  the  genuine 
utterance,  whereas  in  the  case  of  philosophy  the  mere  method 
often  survived  the  thought.  And  in  each  case  the  moral 
example  held  up  to  the  world  was  of  the  nature  of  a  stern 
rebuke,  and  the  world  in  return  expected  the  preacher  of 
righteousness  to  renounce  it. 

Modern  writers  (and  among  them  the  late  Dr.  Hatch)  have 
justly  drawn  attention  to  the  pure  and  spiritual  ideas  at  which 
the  later  Stoic  and  Platonist  thinkers  had  arrived,  and  have 
spoken  of  them  truly  as  "  Seekers  after  God."  Nor  did 
this  point  escape  the  notice  of  the  apologists.  It  seemed 
to  them  so  striking  that  they  could  only  explain  it  by  the 
theory  of  direct  indebtedness  to  the  prophets  of  the  Old 
Testament  or  the  apostles  of  the  New.  If  Plato  spoke  as 
an  Attic  Moses,  Seneca  spoke  as  a  Roman  S.  Paul :  both 
were  retailers  of  borrowed  wisdom.     Our  insight  into  the 

^  I  cannot  bring  myself  to  accept  Matthew  Arnold's  theory  that  the 
only  really  essential  substratum  in  Israel's  conception  of  God  is  the  Un- 
seen Power,  not  ourselves,  that  makes  for  righteousness.  The  element  of 
what,  for  want  of  a  more  exact  name,  we  must  call  Personality  seems  to 
me  a  primordial  part  of  the  conception. 


262  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

progress  of  the  human  spirit  is  larger  than  theirs ;  hence  we 
can  afford  to  smile  at  the  simplicity  of  the  hypothesis  that 
satisfied  their  critical  sense.  But  however  we  may  explain 
it,  the  fact  remains  and  is  of  the  highest  possible  significance, 
that  philosophy  had  become  more  and  more  religious,  and 
that  the  Gospel  seed  was  sown  in  prepared  ground. 

How  came  it  then  that  Greek  philosophy,  instead  of  wel- 
coming Christianity  as  an  ally,  treated  it  with  mistrust,  first 
as  alien  to  itself,  then  as  hostile  ? 

The  answer  is  to  be  found  mainly  in  the  exclusiveness  of 
the  claim  put  forward  by  Christ  for  His  religion.  Nothing 
of  the  sort  had  ever  before  been  suggested.  Philoso^Dhies 
might  be  logically  incompatible  ;  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  they 
existed  side  by  side.  Platonist  and  Aristotelian  might 
wrangle.  Stoic  and  Epicurean  indulge  in  mutual  abuse ;  but 
at  bottom  each  understood  the  other,  and  their  common 
interests  outweighed  their  differences.  But  the  GoD  whose 
unity  was  preached  by  Christians  was  a  jealous  God:  His 
existence  was  neither  to  be  guessed  at  by  conjecture  nor 
proved  by  argument.  He  had  revealed  Himself  once  for  all 
to  man,  and  man's  part  was  to  accept  the  revelation. 

The  pride  of  reason  was  thus  touched  in  its  tenderest  point, 
and  it  could  not  forgive  the  slight.  The  splendid  achieve- 
ments of  human  intellect,  laboriously  wrought  out  in  the  seats 
of  the  highest  culture  through  centuries  of  unaided  toil,^  were, 
so  it  seemed,  to  be  unceremoniously  superseded  by  the  miracle- 
mongering  supernaturalism  of  a  race  of  barbarians  who  had 
contributed  nothing  to  the  civilisation  of  mankind. 

Nor  did  the  first  Christian  preachers  on  their  part  seek  to 
conciliate  philosophy.  With  harshness  indeed,  but  with  a 
prescience  that  fully  justified  it,  they  insisted  on  the  incom- 
petence of  human  wisdom  to  solve  or  even  to  illustrate  the 
problems  with  which  revelation  dealt.     The  instinct  of  the 

1  The  Greeks,  too,  regarded  their  intellectual  life  as  an  inspiration  from 
heaven,  given  specially  to  their  race.  They  made  the  words  of  the  old 
bard  their  own — 

avToUbaKTOs  5'  dfil,  debs  8^  /xol  ev  (ppealv  otuas 

iravTolas  ive(f)vaev. — Horn.  Od,  xxii.  347. 


THE  APOLOGETIC   LITERATURE.  263 

Apostle  did  not  err  when  he  declared  that  his  message  was  to 
the  Greeks  foolishness,  and  warned  his  readers  against  the 
seductions  of  philosophic  antitheses.^ 

The  attitude  of  such  men  as  Celsus  and  Porphyry  abun- 
dantly confirms  the  Apostle's  view.  These  men  could  not 
see  the  superiority  of  Christian  theology  to  their  own.  On 
the  contrary,  they  were  firmly  convinced  of  its  inferiority. 
They  admitted,  indeed,  the  moral  excellence  of  the  Gospel, 
but  they  denied  that  its  ethical  theory  was  so  coherently 
framed  or  so  elegantly  expressed  as  their  own. 

The  idea  of  sitting  at  the  feet  of  a  comparatively  unculti- 
vated teacher  in  the  guise  of  humble  learners  was  utterly 
repugnant  to  their  pride  ;  and  yet  it  seemed  to  both  parties  as 
if  revelation  permitted  no  other  attitude.  So  the  gulf  became 
wider,  and  the  hope  of  mutual  understanding  more  remote. 
Yet  all  the  time  each  party  was  receiving  influence  from  the 
other :  heathenism  in  its  ideas,  Christianity  in  its  methods.  This 
becomes  obvious  when  we  consider  the  Neo-Platonic  system. 
In  this  vast  fabric  of  eclecticism  many  Christian  ideas  are 
introduced,  more  or  less  altered  to  suit  their  surroundings  ; 
and  certain  features  are  borrowed  from  the  Christian  moral 
standard.  Even  Julian  attempted  to  import  into  his  reformed 
Paganism  more  than  one  Christian  element  which,  though  his 
prejudice  might  still  despise,  his  judgment  could  not  but  adopt. 

The  best  philosophers,  indeed,  were  not  indisposed  to  con- 
sider the  claims  of  Christianity.  When  Christian  thinkers 
approached  them  in  a  philosophic  spirit,  they  generally  gave 
them  an  attentive  hearing.  It  was  otherwise  with  such  men 
as  Crescens  the  Cynic,  whose  pretentious  ignorance  Justin 
exposed.  These  men,  from  mortified  vanity,  became  bitter 
enemies  of  Christianity,  and  were  too  often  able  under  colour 
of  the  public  weal  to  carry  out  their  schemes  of  revenge. 

In  Alexandria,  at  any  rate,  the  pleasing  spectacle  is  pre- 
sented of  Christianity  and  philosophy  discussing  with  equal 
learning  and  without  passion  their  rival  claims.  And  it  was 
precisely  at  Alexandria  that  the  Gospel  was  first  successfully 
presented  as  a  system  of  religious  philosophy.     The  great 

^  I  Cor.  i.  23  ;  i  Tim.  vi.  20. 


264  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

Catechists,  Clement  and  Origen,  attended  philosophers'  lec- 
tures themselves,  and  numbered  philosophers  among  their 
own  converts.  This  process  was  not  free  from  risk,  and  in 
fact  it  proved  detrimental  to  the  simplicity  of  their  faith. 
Nevertheless  the  effort  was  a  noble  one  ;  and  even  those  who 
condemned  and  mistrusted  it  were  unconsciously  influenced 
by  its  results. 

To  sum  up  our  remarks  on  this  head,  philosophy,  in  spite 
of  its  lofty  and  often  spiritual  influence,  must  be  ranked  on 
the  whole  as  an  antagonist  of  the  Gospel.  This  assertion,  how- 
ever, requires  two  qualifications.  First,  it  must  be  limited 
by  the  earnest  effort  after  a  mutual  understanding  made 
by  the  Catechists  of  Alexandria,  showing  that  they  did  not 
regard  philosophy  as  an  alien  ;  and  secondly,  it  must  be 
limited  by  the  powerful  reaction  of  Greek  metaphysic  upon 
Christian  theology,  which  endures  to  this  day,  and  has  made 
Christianity  wtually  a  Greek  religion. 

3.  The  Hostility  of  the  Heathen  Religions. 

The  religions  of  the  Empire  were  as  diverse  as  they  were 
numerous.  Some  were  purely  rational,  some  were  prosely- 
tising and  aggressive;  some  were  imaginative,  others  sen- 
suous, others  harsh  and  cruel;  some  tended  to  a  dreamy 
asceticism,  others  to  fanatical  excitement,  others  to  impure 
orgies.  The  tendency  of  one  was  to  priestcraft,  of  another 
to  magic,  of  a  third  to  ceremonialism,  of  a  fourth  to  mystery. 
But  all  found  a  home  in  the  Imperial  City ;  all,  except  a  few 
sanguinary  superstitions  which  still  lingered  in  remoter  pro- 
vinces, were  not  only  tolerated  but  gained  fresh  adherents. 
The  rivalry  of  sectarianism  which  prevails  to-day  within  the 
Christian  sphere  was  in  those  days  spread  over  a  multitude 
of  contradictory  faiths. 

It  is  perhaps  hard  for  us  to  do  justice  to  the  genuineness 

of  Pagan  belief.     We  do  not  allude  so  much  to  those  dark 

mysterious   doctrines  which  we   find  in  EgyjDt   or  eastern 

i     Asia,  for  we  know  from  the  Old  Testament  how  intense  and 

L^ven  fanatical  was  the  devotion  which  these  inspired.     But 


THE  APOLOGETIC   LITERATURE.  265 

it  is  in  the  case  of  Greece  especially  that  we  fail  to  realise 
how  sincere  the  people's  religious  convictions  were.  We  are 
so  accustomed  to  draw  our  notions  of  the  Greek  mind  from 
the  great  classical  writers,  that  we  insensibly  regard  their 
attitude  towards  the  popular  religion  as  representing  that  of 
the  people.  And  yet  no  conclusion  could  possibly  be  more 
erroneous.  If  we  desire  to  criticise  with  sympathy  the 
manifestations  of  religious  belief  in  Greek  history,  we  must 
put  out  of  our  mind  once  for  all  the  great  aristocrats  of 
thought,  and  apply  our  attention  to  writers  who  stand  on  a 
more  genuinely  popular  level. 

That  the  polytheistic  creed  was  tenaciously  held,  and 
defended  when  necessary  by  the  weapons  of  bigotry,  is 
absolutely  certain.  To  go  no  further  than  Athens,  the  im- 
prisonment of  Anaxagoras  and  the  death  of  Socrates  are 
sufficient  proofs  of  this.  But  these  happened  in  the  fifth 
century  B.C.  In  leaping  over  a  period  of  six  hundred  years, 
a  period  marked  by  continuous  intellectual  progress,  and 
so  presumably  of  scepticism,  we  hardly  expect  to  find  the 
same  general  prevalence  of  sincere  belief.  During  all  this 
long  interval  j^oets  and  philosophers  had  continued  to  explain 
away  and  ridicule  the  popular  mythology.  They  had  addressed 
an  ever-widening  circle  of  hearers.  It  seemed  impossible 
but  that  their  views  should  spread.  They  could  point  to 
the  fact  that  few  men  of  any  position  professed  religious 
belief ;  ^  they  could  prove  with  crushing  effect  the  impotence 
of  the  so-called  deities  to  resist  the  Roman  arms.  And  the 
conclusion  would  seem  irresistible  that  the  religion  which 
acknowledged  these  deities  must  be  felt  to  be  false. 

1  It  is  instructive  to  compare  the  present  indifference  of  men,  both  in 
Protestant  and  Catholic  countries,  to  dogmatic  religion.  It  is  obvious 
that  religion  in  its  spiritual  sense  had  no  part  in  the  life  of  the  public 
men  of  Kome  under  the  later  Republic.  Cicero's  letters  show  no  trace  of 
susceptibility  to  spiritual  influence.  Csesar  made  in  the  Senate  a  public 
avowal  of  his  unbelief.  Juvenal  declares  that  religious  sanctions  of  con- 
duct were  all  but  universally  discredited  in  his  time.  Yet  the  remarkable 
religious  revival  which  meets  us  at  the  close  of  the  first  century  A.d.  must 
have  been  sufficiently  visible  to  discerning  eyes  as  far  back  as  Augustus, 
who  tried  by  every  means  to  encourage  it,  though  personally  he  could 
have  had  no  sympathy  whatever  with  it. 


266  ■    THE  APOLOGISTS. 

Yet  it  is  evident  that  this  conclusion,  natural  as  it  appears, 
was  not  drawn.  The  mass  of  men  never  have  been,  and  we 
may  safely  affirm  never  will  be,  without  belief  in  the  super- 
natural. Gibbon  is  nearer  the  mark  when,  speaking  of 
these  times,  he  says — "The  various  religions  of  the  Empire 
appeared  to  the  people  to  be  all  equally  true."  Certain  it 
is  that  unless  there  had  been  a  genuine  conviction  of  the 
truth  of  Paganism,  men  like  Tertullian  and  Augustine  would 
not  have  set  themselves  so  energetically  to  confute  it. 

The  reason  is  to  be  found  in  the  universal  craving  of  the 
human  spirit  for  some  religious  belief.  In  default  of  a  nobler 
faith,  the  oft-refuted  fables  of  mythology  were  still  cherished 
as  the  only  traces  left  of  something  beyond  the  hard  realities 
of  the  visible  world,  as  the  only  link  that  bound  the  spirit  to 
a  higher  and  happier  past. 

Nations  like  the  Gauls,  who  had  no  such  mythology,  or  like 
the  Asiatics,  to  whom  power  is  the  symbol  of  Deity,  doubtless 
accepted  the  apotheosis  of  Csesar  as  something  more  than  an 
artifice  of  state  policy.  The  Emperor,  if  not  conceived  of  as 
actually  Divine,  was  certainly  regarded  as  the  representative 
of  heaven.  And  in  the  general  decay  of  spiritual  and  moral 
life  this  may  have  seemed  the  only  barrier  against  pure 
materialism,  and  have  been  held  with  a  grasp,  unreasoning, 
and  yet  despairingly  strong. 

From  these  and  other  causes  there  arose  about  the  end  of 
the  first  century  of  our  era  a  very  decided  religious  reaction. 
The  leaders  of  thought,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  display 
for  the  first  time  a  distinctly  religious  tone.  Among  the 
masses  also  religious  sentiment  became  extremely  and  even 
morbidly  active.  The  physical  interpretation  of  mythology, 
which  satisfied  men  of  science,  had  no  attraction  for  the 
vulgar.  For  them  a  different  path  of  satisfaction  was  thrown 
open,  the  chief  extant  representative  of  which  is  Apuleius. 
Taking  his  stand  on  one  aspect  of  Plato's  philosophy,  especially 
that  revealed  in  the  Timgeus,  he  reconciled  mythology  with 
the  religious  sense  by  identifying  the  old  gods  with  those 
intermediate  spirits  who  act  as  agents  of  the  suj^reme  Deity 
in  the  material  world.     These  spiritual  beings,  to  whom  was 


THE  APOLOGETIC   LITERATURE.  267 

given  the  name  of  Demons  [haifxove^),  were  held  to  partake 
in  some  degree  of  a  carnal  nature,  and  to  their  dominion  were 
assigned  nearly  all  the  departments  of  human  life.  They  might 
still  be  worshipped  under  the  old  familiar  names  of  the  gods, 
and  thus  man's  spirit  might  still  expatiate  in  the  sense  of  its 
union  with  the  unseen  world.  So  profoundly  suitable  was  this 
doctrine  to  the  wants  of  the  age,  that  it  was  accepted  by  a 
large  portion  of  mankind.  Not  only  to  the  Pagan  idolater, 
but  to  the  Christian  apologist,  it  seemed  to  embody  an  impor- 
tant truth.  But  whereas  to  the  one  it  opened  out  a  new  field 
of  soul- satisfying  worship,  to  the  other  it  appeared  as  the 
terrible  penalty  of  a  judicial  blindness  by  which  the  powers 
of  evil  were  mistaken  for  those  of  good.  Almost  all  the 
apologists  assume  the  reality  of  these  intermediate  beings ; 
they  never  doubt  the  probability  of  their  influencing  the 
minds  of  men ;  and  no  small  portion  of  their  arguments  is 
spent  in  proving  by  incontestable  evidence  their  malignant 
nature,  and  the  intolerable  bondage  to  which  they  had  reduced 
mankind. 

We  are  apt  to  marvel  at  the  wearisome  reiteration  with 
which  one  controversialist  after  another  traces  the  pheno- 
mena of  sacrifice,  augury,  ritual,  magic  and  astrology,  to  a 
demonic  source;  at  the  prolix  minuteness  with  which  they 
describe  the  attributes  of  these  beings,  and  the  triumphant 
energy  with  which  they  challenge  them  to  the  critical  ordeal 
of  exorcism.  But  unless  we  clearly  apprehend  the  connec- 
tion in  tbeir  minds  between  the  demonology  of  the  Platonic 
schools  and  the  doctrine  of  evil  angels  which  had  come  to 
them  through  Jewish  channels,  we  shall  fail  to  appreciate  the 
task  which  they  set  themselves  to  accomplish. 

Simultaneously  with  this  popular  reformation  of  heathen- 
ism there  rose  into  prominence  a  very  different  form  of  reli- 
gious influence,  which  appealed  to  the  purer  and  more  devout 
minds.  The  Mysteries  or  secret  religious  rites  had  long 
existed  in  various  parts  of  the  world,  in  connection  with  the 
older  and  more  awe-inspiring  cults.  Paganism  had  by  them 
striven  to  purify  the  souls  of  its  votaries,  and  raise  them  to 
higher  and  more  spiritual  beliefs.     It  is  not  our  purpose  to 


268  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

give  any  description  of  these  deeply  interesting  efforts  of  the 
ancient  world  to  satisfy  the  aspirations  of  the  indi\^dual  soul. 
But  there  is  evidence  enough  to  show  that  for  many  cen- 
turies they  preserved  broken  reminiscences  of  the  primal 
revelation,  faint  glimmerings  of  the  "  Light  which  lighteth 
every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world."  And  so  striking 
was  their  analogy  to  the  inner  doctrines  of  the  Church  that 
some  of  their  distinctive  terms  came  to  be  applied  to  parallel 
features  of  the  Christian  faith. 

The  very  word  /jLvartjpLov  is  used  for  the  Christian  sacra- 
ments. The  terms  ^&)Tto-/^o9  (i.e.,  illumination)  and  reXerrj 
(i.e.,  initiation)  are  often  employed  to  designate  baptism.  The 
expressions  /jLefivrj/jiepot  (initiated)  and  dfjLvrjroL  (uninitiated) 
are  common  to  the  mysteries  and  to  Christianity.  While 
therefore  we  emphasise  the  double  conflict  that  engaged  the 
Church,  on  the  one  hand  with  the  grosser  Paganism,  on  the 
other  with  its  higher  esoteric  forms,  we  must  also  remark 
that  the  attitude  of  the  Christian  apologist  was  different  in 
the  two  cases.  Towards  the  one  it  was  simple,  uncompro- 
mising hostility.  Towards  the  other,  it  was  sympathetic  so 
far  as  concerned  the  object  aimed  at,  but  antagonistic  so  far 
as  concerned  the  means  employed,  which  it  showed  to  be  but 
a  vain  shadow  of  the  real  method  of  salvation. 

From  these  two  sources  of  renewed  religious  ^'itality  it  is 
impossible  to  doubt  that  a  genuine  though  perverted  religious 
enthusiasm  arose.  It  would  be  unjust  to  the  popular  Pagan- 
ism to  see  in  it  nothing  but  blind  unreasoning  hatred  of 
Christianity.  No  doubt  the  moral  laxity  which  everywhere 
accompanied  heathen  rites  proved  a  fatal  stumbling-block  to 
the  acce^Dtance  of  a  purer  faith.  And  this  widesjDread  depravity 
was  encouraged  by  the  cynical  indulgence  allowed  by  the 
Koman  authority  to  the  coarse  and  brutal  passions  of  the 
multitude. 

The  introduction  of  gladiatorial  shows  had  fearfully 
whetted  that  thirst  for  blood  which  is  inherent  in  unre- 
generate  human  nature.  And  the  temptation  to  gratify  this 
appetite  by  a  display  of  zeal  for  the  insulted  gods  proved  too 
strong  for  a  degenerate  and  corrupted  world.     Nevertheless, 


THE  APOLOGETIC  LITERATURE.  269 

it  should  be  remembered  that  the  government  as  well  as  the 
priesthood  had  encouraged  the  disposition  to  regard  the 
Christians  as  atheists.  Moreover,  the  secrecy  of  their  assem- 
blies, the  absence  of  image  or  altar,  and  their  apparent 
adoration  of  an  obscure  Jewish  Criminal,  made  the  charge 
sufficiently  plausible.  To  this  must  be  added  the  jealous 
silence  under  which  they  veiled  their  doctrines,  and  their 
vague  predictions  of  an  impending  destruction  of  the  world 
by  fire,  which,  when  judged  through  an  unfavourable  medium, 
might  seem  to  justify  the  opprobrious  epithet  of  enemies  of 
the  human  race.  The  reputation  of  an  atheist  was  not  more 
favourable  then  than  it  is  now.  And  we  need  not  fear  to 
admit  that  the  blind  rage  of  the  populace  was  founded  to 
some  extent  on  a  genuine  horror  of  atheism,  as  well  as  of 
those  nefarious  immoralities  of  which  the  calumniators  of 
Christ's  religion  asserted  it  to  be  the  cloak.  That  Chris- 
tians were  in  fact  condemned  to  death  as  atheists  we  know 
from  abundant  testimony.  And  the  horrors  which  they  were 
accused  of  perpetrating  at  their  nocturnal  rites,  if  really 
believed,  would  be  sufficient  to  arouse  a  fury  which  no 
considerations  of  common  sense  or  justice  could  avail  to 
control.^ 

Accordingly,  we  find  that  in  their  popular  treatises  the 
apologists  direct  their  arguments  to  the  proof  of  two  points 
in  especial — first,  that  they  are  not  atheists,  but  worshippers 
of  the  only  true  God  ;  and  secondly,  that  their  religious  rites 
and  Christian  practices  are  such  as  deserve  from  the  com- 
munity nothing  but  gratitude  and  praise.  In  proving  these 
points,  they  naturally  retort  upon  their  adversaries,  and,  in 
clearing  themselves,  show  with  unsparing  cogency  that  the 
charges  both  of  atheism  and  of  unnatural  lust  are  in  reality 
applicable  to  the  heathen  systems. 

As  time  rolled  on,  we  find  that  these  charges,  founded  on 

^  How  terribly  inveterate  this  sort  of  prejudice  is  may  be  seen  from  the 
periodical  outbreaks  of  popular  rage  at  the  present  day  in  countries  like 
Austria  and  Russia,  where  the  belief  prevails  that  Jews  occasionally  murder 
a  Christian  infant  for  religious  purposes.  This  sort  of  prejudice  defies  the 
strongest  disproof. 


270 


THE  APOLOGISTS. 


calumny  and  ignorance,  were  gradually  dropped,  and  others 
of  greater  plausibility  put  forward.  Celsus  makes  no  allusion 
to  them.  He  substitutes  for  them  others  which  he  considers 
equally  damaging ;  for  instance,  that  Christians  are  the 
cause  of  the  calamities  which  the  offended  gods  hurl  upon 
the  earth  ;  that  they  are  bad  subjects  and  conspirators  against 
the  Empire ;  that  they  engender  a  spirit  of  faction,  hatred 
and  distrust  ;  that  they  embroil  the  relations  of  social  life. 

All  such  accusations  are  dealt  with  at  length  by  the 
apologists ;  but  so  inveterate  were  they  that  even  in  the 
time  of  Augustine,  when  Christianity  had  fully  established 
its  supremacy,  it  was  still  felt  necessary  to  give  them  a 
formal  and  at  length  a  final  refutation. 

4.  The  Hostility  of  the  State. 

/^The  last,  and  in  some  respects  the  most  formidable  obstacle 
to  the  acceptance  of  Christianity  within  the  Empire,  was  the 
attitude  of  the  supreme  power  towards  it.  This  attitude  was 
not  clearly  understood  by  the  early  Christian  apologists.  It 
appeared  to  them  vacillating  and  inconsistent,  depending  on 
the  caprice  of  individual  rulers ;  whereas  a  deeper  study  of 
the  phenomena  has  shown  that  a  continuous  line  of  policy 
^  may  be  traced  connecting  measures  apparently  at  variance. 
The  key  to  this  policy  is  the  conception  of  religion  enter- 
tained by  Eoman  law.  Eeligion  was  regarded  not  as  a  body 
of  spiritual  truth,  nor  as  a  matter  of  conscientious  belief,  but 
solely  as  a  department  of  the  State.^  To  coerce  the  conscience 
to  embrace  any  set  of  opinions  was  a  thing  unknown  to 
Graeco-Roman  civilisation.  Provided  obedience  was  rendered 
to  the  requirements  of  the  State,  the  peculiarities  of  national 
religions  were  respected,  and  allowance  made  for  conscientious 
difficulties.    This  is  clearly  shown  by  the  treatment  accorded 

1  The  French  Republic  imitates  the  Roman  Empire  in  this  respect.  Yet 
the  two  positions  are  not  really  analogous.  For  whereas  the  French  State, 
as  a  State,  is  indifferent  to  religion,  and  merely  provides  for  the  needs  of 
its  subjects'  consciences,  the  Roman  State  regarded  the  right  worship  of 
the  gods  as  an  essential  condition  of  its  own  well-being. 


THE  APOLOGETIC  LITERATURE.  271 

to  the  Jews.  No  nation  in  the  world  was  more  disliked  by 
the  Eomans,  and  no  religion  in  the  world  was  so  incompre- 
hensible and  so  distasteful  to  them.  Few  of  the  conquered 
peoples  had  given  them  more  trouble,  probably  none  bore 
them  so  little  good-will.  If  anything  could  excuse  a  policy 
of  coercion  of  conscience,  that  excuse  might  have  been  urged 
in  their  case.  And  yet,  what  do  we  find  ?  The  conscientious 
scru]3les  of  the  Jews  were  on  the  whole  respected  by  the 
Emperors.  Their  occasional  violation  was  the  result  of  insane 
caprice  or  of  uncontrollable  anger,  sometimes  of  unintentional 
blundering.  The  Jews  themselves  made  no  allowance  for  the 
inexperience  of  their  rulers  in  matters  spiritual.  They  gave 
no  facilities  for  the  carrying  on  of  the  work  of  secular  govern- 
ment. Their  turbulence  was  not,  as  in  the  case  of  other 
nations,  the  result  of  ordinary  motives,  such  as  the  secular- 
minded  Eomans  could  appreciate  while  they  punished,  but 
was  complicated  with  mysterious  expectations  of  a  divine 
kingdom  and  an  ever-increasing  multiplicity  of  unintelligible 
scruples,  which  the  Eomans,  utterly  unable  to  understand, 
felt  compelled  to  ascribe  to  the  worst  of  all  motives,  hatred 
of  the  human  race.  In  spite  of  these  elements  of  provoca- 
tion, the  Jews  demanded,  and  the  government  granted  them, 
the  free  exercise  of  their  religion,  with  due  provision  for  the 
safeguarding  of  their  abhorrence  of  every  form  of  idolatry. 
Judaism  was  one  of  the  Religiones  Licitae  or  State-protected 
religions,  which  the  Emperor  and  all  his  officials  were  bound 
by  law  to  respect. 

In  the  modern  sense  of  the  word,  therefore,  the  Eoman 
government  was  truly  tolerant.  It  exacted  no  more  from 
the  adherents  of  the  subject  religions  than  it  exacted  from 
the  adherents  of  its  own.  It  interfered  in  no  respect  with 
freedom  of  conscience,  except  so  far  as  that  freedom  inter- 
fered with  obedience  to  its  own  institutions.  Even  atheism, 
so  far  as  it  was  merely  speculative,  received  no  condemnation 
from  the  law.  Only  those  opinions  or  rites  were  forbidden 
which  were  considered  injurious  to  public  order  or  public 
morals.  Not  once,  but  many  times  in  Eoman  history  had 
the  State  interfered  to  suppress  religious  rites  which  had  a 


272  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

disturbing  or  immoral  tendency.  The  permission  accorded 
to  the  Jews  to  exercise  their  religion  without  hindrance, 
while  limited  by  these  two  conditions,  was  in  harmony  with 
the  whole  spirit  of  Eoman  legislation. 

How  then  are  we  to  account  for  the  apparent  inconsistency 
of  its  attitude  towards  the  Christian  faith  ?  In  the  first  place, 
by  its  ignorance  of  the  true  character  of  Christianity;  in  the 
second,  by  its  instinctive  discernment,  so  soon  as  the  true 
character  of  Christianity  began  to  be  understood,  that  it  was 
irreconcilable  with  the  established  government.  In  the  early 
days  of  Christianity,  its  origin  in  Judaea,  and  the  fact  that  its 
preachers  were  nearly  all  Jews,  led  to  its  being  regarded  as 
a  mere  sect  of  Judaism.  Thus  it  would  be  allowed  to  avail 
itself  of  the  impunity  accorded  to  Judaism,  as  a  permitted 
faith.  And  for  a  time  it  undoubtedly  enjoyed  this  privilege. 
The  first  troubles  through  which  the  Church  passed  were  not, 
strictly  speaking,  persecutions  by  the  central  government. 
Even  the  atrocious  cruelties  of  Nero,  when,  taking  advantage 
of  the  unpopularity  of  the  Christians  in  Eome,  he  made  them 
the  scapegoats  of  an  anger  directed  against  himself,  were  not 
acts  of  legal  violence,  but  merely  the  extension  of  Imperial 
authority  to  an  outburst  of  blind  hatred,  which  demanded  a 
victim,  and  for  which  no  other  victims  equally  acceptable  to 
the  multitude  were  at  hand.  It  was  only  gradually,  and  in  a 
great  measure  owing  to  the  hostility  of  the  Jews,  that  the 
Roman  authorities  came  to  apprehend  the  distinctness  of 
Christianity  from  Judaism,  and  that  it  was  in  truth  a  wholly 
independent  religion.  When  once  this  was  understood, 
Christianity  lost  the  position  it  had  hitherto  unwittingly 
occupied,  of  a  religion  allowed  by  the  State.  It  sank  at 
once  to  the  status  of  a  cult  unrecognised  by  law.  Only  two 
courses  were  now  possible  to  the  government.  It  might 
ignore  Christianity,  or  it  might  suppress  it.  The  great 
statesmen  who  directed  the  Empire  were  as  indisposed  as 
modern  rulers  would  be  to  spread  the  devastating  horrors  of 
religious  persecution.  The  famous  rescript  of  Trajan  shows 
a  clear  grasp  of  the  situation  as  it  appeared  to  the  wisest 
ruler  of  that  time,  and  one  of  the  wisest  of  any  time.     He 


THE  APOLOGETIC   LITERATURE.  273 

forbade  inquisition  to  be  made  for  Christians,  but  at  the 
same  time  he  ordered  that,  when  their  offence  was  proved, 
they  should  be  punished  according  to  law. 

It  has  been  shown  by  Lightfoot  and  others  that  a  Koman 
Emperor  was  prevented  by  his  position  of  guardian  of  the 
laws  from  extending  indulgence  to  such  as  refused  to  sacri- 
fice. By  a  terrible  irony  of  fate,  the  most  conscientious  and 
patriotic  Emperors  were  precisely  those  who  felt  least  able  to 
pass  over  what  they  were  bound  to  regard  as  a  direct  act  of 
treason  to  the  State.  Nothing  in  the  whole  course  of  human 
history  is  more  mournful  than  the  fact  that  the  wise  and 
enlightened  Trajan,  the  gentle  and  deeply  religious  Aurelius, 
have  to  be  counted  among  the  persecutors.  It  is  true  that 
the  Church,  with  noble  generosity,  chose  to  forget  Trajan's 
attitude  to  the  Bithynian  Christians,  and  to  award  to  his 
lofty  character  the  sacred  tribute  of  her  prayers.  And  it  is 
also  true  that  many  apologists  speak  with  real  enthusiasm 
of  Marcus  Aurelius,  and  his  occasional  protection  of  their 
brethren.  But  the  gravamen  so  ^^ointedly  urged  by  Ter- 
tullian,  non  licet  esse  vos  ("you  have  no  legal  right  to  exist  "),^ 
still  remained.  It  was  still  the  great  and  standing  offence  of 
Christianity,  that  in  spite  of  its  intrinsic  holiness,  in  spite  of 
its  daily  increasing  numbers,  in  spite  of  its  good  services  to 
the  community,  it  could  produce  no  certificate  of  birth ;  that 
it  persisted  in  existing,  in  growing,  in  claiming  a  place 
among  a  society  which  had  refused  to  make  room  for  it. 

And  in  this  lay  the  whole  strength  of  the  power  to  perse- 
cute. The  laws  afforded  Christianity  no  protection.  The 
utmost  that  a  favourable  ruler  could  do  was  to  discourage 
information  against  the  Christians  by  imposing  penalties 
upon  their  accusers.  And  this  was  actually  done  by  more 
than  one  Emperor.^  But  wherever  the  Christians  were  con- 
spicuous from  their  number,  or  for  any  reason  specially 
obnoxious  to  the  multitude,  it  was  not  difficult  to  oblige 
the    magistrate   to    set   the    law   in    motion    against   them. 

1  E.g.,  the  rescript  of  Hadrian,  preserved  in  Justin's  first  Apology, 
chap.  68,  which  forbids  attention  to  mere  rumours,  and  insists  upon  proof 
of  unlawful  action  being  given. 

S 


274  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

Looking  at  the   different  persecutions,   we  observe  that  in 
the  majority  of  cases  it  was  not  the  representative  of  the 
Emperor,  but  the  mass  of  the  people  that  instigated  them. 
Often  a  prefect  or  proconsul  was  reluctantly  comjoelled  to 
pass    sentence    on   one  whom    he    had  tried  hard  to    save. 
And,   on  the  whole,   it  is  clear  that,   had  the  law  allowed 
a  discretionary  power,  the  magistrates  would  in  many  cases 
have  refused  to  condemn.      But  the    Em2:)ire   was    erected 
on  the  popular  will,  and  the  prince   could  not  venture  to 
override  its  manifestation.     In  later  times,  when  the  adhe- 
rents of  Christianity  were  as  numerous  as  their  opponents, 
and  their  support  was  clearly  worth  possessing,  the  personal 
bias  of  the  Emperor  would  count  for  much  more.     He  could 
extend  his  protection  to  the    Church   with    an    effect  that 
Marcus  Aurelius  could  not  have  rivalled ;  or  he  could  nerve 
the  weakened  arm  of  Paganism  to  strike  its  last  blow,  with 
an  interest  in  the  contest  far  more  direct  and  personal  than 
the  early  Emperors  could  have  conceived. 
X  The  great  preliminary  task  of  the  Christian  writers  was, 
therefore,  to  explain  their  true   aims  and  character  to  the 
Emperor,  to  remove  the  misconception  as  to  their  disloyalty  to 
the  government,  and  so  to  secure  a  place  among  the  tolerated 
sects.     Let  us  consider  for  a  moment  the  justice  of  their 
request  from  the  Imperial  point  of  view.     There  were  two 
prejudices  so  engrained  in  the  minds  of  the  Caesars  that  they 
seem  to  have  admitted  no  argument  upon  them.     The  first 
was  the  prejudice  against  clubs  [sodalitates),  associations,  or 
guilds  of  every  sort,   which  they  could  not  help  believing 
must  be  utilised  for  purposes  of  political  disaffection.     The 
result  was  that,  except  under  the  most  careful  restrictions, 
all  such  associations  were  forbidden.     The  correspondence  of 
Trajan  and  Pliny  reveals  this  to  be  a  cardinal  feature  of  the 
great  Emperor's  policy.     The  closely-guarded  love-feasts  of 
Christian  believers,  and  their  gatherings  before  daybreak  for 
common  worship,  were  inexplicable  except  on  the  ground  of 
some  secret  purpose;  and  as  they  refused  to  ex]3lain  the  details 
and  meaning  of  that  worship,  it  seemed  reasonable  to  conclude 
that  that  purpose  must  be  fraught  with  danger  to  the  State. 


THE  APOLOGETIC   LITERATURE.  275 

The  other  prejudice  concerned  the  refusal  to  burn  incense 
before  Caesar's  image,  which  was  universally  interpreted  to 
imply  disloyalty  to  Cgesar's  power.  It  was  true  the  Jews  were 
not  required  to  perform  this  act.  But  the  Jews'  religion  was 
a  strictly  national  one,  and  for  such  the  Romans  had  always 
respect.  Again,  the  Jews'  religion  was  ancient,  and  the 
Romans  reverenced  antiquity  more  than  any  other  people. 
Moreover,  the  Jews  showed  no  desire  to  convert  all  mankind ; 
still  less  did  they  speak  of  a  kingdom  soon  to  come,  which 
should  embrace  all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  and  involve  the 
existing  fabric  in  one  awful  destruction.  Hence  the  attitude 
of  the  Christians,  though  not  theoretically  different  from  that 
of  the  Jews,  was  practically  different,  which  laid  it  the  more 
open  to'  attack,  because  the  ingrained  political  suspicion  and 
jealousy,  which  had  grown  with  Rome's  growth  and  deepened 
with  her  extending  power,  were  roused  by  the  rumours  current 
about  the  rise  of  Christianity,  and  unconsciously  confirmed 
by  the  language  of  Christians  themselves. 

Yet,  if  we  turn  to  the  Christian  standpoint,  we  shall  see 
abundant  cause  to  endorse  the  complaint  that  they  could  not 
obtain  a  fair  hearing.  If  such  an  emperor  as  Trajan,  Hadrian, 
or  either  of  the  Antonines  had  been  at  the  pains  to  study 
thoroughly  the  statements  of  advocates  so  highly  qualified  as 
Melito,  Justin,  or  Tertullian,  or  if  they  had  instituted  a  com- 
mission to  inquire  into  the  political  influence  of  Christianity 
and  draw  up  a  formal  report,  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that 
some  concession  would  have  been  made,  sufficient  at  any  rate 
to  redeem  the  Empire  from  the  terrible  stigma  of  injustice 
towards  its  loyal  subjects.  At  the  bar  of  history,  the  great 
and  in  many  ways  beneficent  administration  of  the  Empire 
must  plead  guilty  to  the  grave  error  of  not  considering  it 
worth  while  to  obtain  full  information  before  it  acted  in  a 
matter  of  life  and  death  to  subjects  whom  it  was  bound  to 
protect.  It  may  be  that  even  so  the  conclusion  drawn  would 
have  been  adverse.  It  may  be  that  the  incompatibility  of 
a  monotheism  which  intended  to  convert  the  world  with  a 
despotism  based  on  the  divinity  of  Rome  and  of  Cassar  would 
have  been  clearly  realised  by  the  Ruler,  and  the  suppression 


276  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

of  the  new  creed  deliberately  resolved  on.  But  in  that  case 
the  bitter  complaint  of  the  apologists  could  not  have  stood 
in  its  present  form.  The  taunt  that  they  were  condemned 
unheard  would  have  lost  its  force,  and  the  Empire  would 
have  stood  higher  in  the  estimation  of  mankind  for  not 
having  shrunk  from  the  most  painful  of  all  the  duties  that 
fall  upon  a  human  being,  that  of  frankly  facing  and  resolving 
honestly  to  grapple  with  an  unwelcome  truth. 

Besides  the  above  four  opposing  forces,  of  which  we  have 
attempted  to  give  a  slight  sketch,  there  were  many  other 
obstacles  to  the  spread  of  Christ's  religion.  There  was  the 
prevailing  degradation  of  moral  and  social  life,  the  licen- 
tiousness of  both  sexes,  the  constant  admixture  of  idolatry 
with  every  transaction  of  business  or  of  pleasure,  the  public 
amusements,  the  horrors  of  slavery,  and  all  the  thousand 
inconsistencies  which  a  society  based  on  heathenism  brought 
every  day  before  the  conscience  of  a  Christian.  But  these 
things  belong  to  a  history  of  the  Church  rather  than  to  a 
history  of  its  literature.  We  therefore  pass  them  over,  merely 
remarking  that  the  writings  of  the  earlier  Fathers  are  full 
of  references  to  the  difficulties  which  surrounded  the  pro- 
fession of  Christ,  difficulties  of  which  it  is  impossible  for  us  to 
form  an  adequate  idea  unless  we  are  acquainted  at  first  hand 
with  the  works  not  only  of  the  Christian  writers,  but  of  the 
heathen  historians  and  satirists,  who  show  us  plainly  that  the 
Christian  picture  is  not  overdrawn.  It  is  our  desire  to  state 
as  temperately  as  possible  the  actual  problems  that  were 
present  to  the  minds  of  the  pioneers  of  Christian  civilisation, 
so  as  to  indicate  how,  under  the  guidance  of  the  Divine  Spirit, 
these  problems  were  met,  and  how  the  leaders  of  Catholic 
thought  laid  down  the  lines  on  which  the  immense  super- 
structures of  dogmatic  faith  were  afterwards  so  successfully 
raised. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE  DIFFERENT  CLASSES  OF  APOLOGISTS. 

Having  offered  in  the  last  chapter  some  general  remarks  on 
the  surroundings  of  the  Christian  apologists,  we  now  proceed 
to  classify  their  writings.  This  is  by  no  means  easy.  Several 
modes  of  division  have  been  proposed. 

The  first  classification  divides  them  into  (i)  such  as 
were  addressed  directly  to  the  civil  power  under  the  stress 
of  persecution,  refuting  calumnious  accusation,  and  plead- 
ing for  the  removal  of  prohibitive  legal  enactments ;  (2) 
such  as  were  addressed  to  the  educated  public  in  general, 
appealing  indeed  to  their  justice  to  give  the  Christian 
cause  a  hearing,  but  mainly  concerned  in  proving  that 
Christianity  is  the  only  true  religion.  These  two  classes  of 
writing  have  very  distinct  aims :  the  first  is  strictly  apolo- 
getic, the  second  mainly  didactic.  But  nevertheless  it  is 
impossible  to  separate  them.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  most 
Apologies  belong  at  once  to  both  classes.  Those  of  Justin 
and  Tertullian  contain  long  expositions  of  the  faith ;  yet 
they  are  both  directly  practical  and  forensic  in  their  object : 
that  of  Minucius  is  a  mere  literary  treatise  addressed  to  a 
private  friend,  yet  it  would  probably  plead  more  effectively 
with  a  proconsul  or  an  Emperor  than  almost  any  of  those 
directly  addressed  to  them. 

Another  classification  is  made  to  depend  on  the  class  of 

opponents  which  the  writer  had  in  view — according  as  these 

were   (i)  Jews  or  (2)  Pagans.     This  has  the  advantage  of 

corresponding  to  a   genuine  difference  in  treatment,  since  in 

their  controversy  with  Judaism  the  Fathers  make  free  use 

of  the  Old  Testament,   whereas  in  their  controversy  with 

Paganism  they  seek  for  other  proofs.     The  reader  will  find 

in  Smith's  "  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography  "  an  admirable 

277 


278  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

account  of  apologetic  literature  considered  from  this  point 
of  view. 

But  both  these  classifications  have  primary  reference  to 
the  history  and  doctrine  of  the  Church  rather  than  to  its 
literature.  It  will  be  necessary  for  our  present  purpose  to 
go  more  deeply  into  the  question,  and  to  classify  these  im- 
portant writings  not  according  to  their  external  object,  but 
according  to  their  internal  spirit  and  method.  We  shall 
bring  into  the  clearest  possible  relief  the  central  principle 
which  pervades  each  school  of  apologetic  thought,  and  show 
its  influence  on  the  mind  of  Christendom. 

The  two  main  tendencies  of  apologetics  are  determined  by 
the  two  fundamental  conceptions  of  the  relation  between  God 
and  man  already  referred  to  in  the  Introduction,  and  corre- 
spond roughly  to  the  two  great  divisions  of  Christendom  into 
East  and  West. 

The  tendency  of  Greek  Christianity  is  to  lay  down  as  a 
first  principle  the  essential  kinship  between  the  Divine  and 
human,  so  that  whatever  is  most  truly  and  perfectly  human  is 
really  Divine,  and  the  revelation  of  the  Divine  in  human  his- 
tory is  not  the  sudden  apparition  of  an  alien  element,  but  the 
progressive  manifestation  of  an  abiding  presence,  brought  to 
its  culminating  perfection  in  the  Incarnation  of  Christ. 

It  follows  from  this  that  both  Judaism  and  Paganism 
were  stages  in  the  progressive  manifestation  of  God  in  man 
through  Christ ;  and  that  both  were  Divinely  appointed,  the 
one  to  lead  the  Jews,  the  other  to  lead  the  Gentiles,  to  find 
themselves  in  Him. 

The  source  of  this  fruitful  thought  must  be  sought  in  the 
Gospel  of  S.  John,  where  it  is  stated  with  incomparable  em- 
phasis, though  only  as  a  germ,  in  which,  however,  all  the 
legitimate  developments  of  the  Alexandrian  theology  are 
implicitly  involved. 

The  first  Church  writer  who  attempts  to  found  an  apolo- 
getic system  on  this  basis  is  Justin  Martyr.  He  is  not,  indeed, 
able  to  maintain  it  with  consistency ;  but  to  him  belongs  the 
credit  of  fixing  it  as  a  principle  from  which  results  of  vast 
importance  were  in  due  time  to  follow. 


THE  DIFFERENT  CLASSES   OF  APOLOGISTS.      279 

He  was  succeeded  by  Athenagoras,  whom  an  obscure  tra- 
dition connects  with  the  catechetical  school  of  Alexandria. 
Pantaenus  followed  in  the  same  direction,  and  impressed  the 
doctrine,  which  is  partly  theological  and  partly  philosophical, 
upon  his  eminent  disciple  Clement. 

It  is  Clement  who  most  distinctly  and  unflinchingly  applies 
this  principle  to  the  whole  domain  of  Christian  thought.  His 
writings  throughout  kindle  with  a  triumphant  consciousness 
of  the  essential  relationship  between  man  and  God.  This 
relationship  he  regards  as  no  mere  accidental  act  of  grace 
conferred  on  one  who  had  no  original  title  to  it.  Still  less  is 
it  a  necessary  outcome  of  the  Divine  Nature  expressing  itself 
in  man  by  a  law  of  its  own  being.  It  springs  from  the 
definition  of  God  as  Love,  and  from  the  conception  of  that 
Love  as  everlastingly  manifested  in  the  Son,  in  whom  the 
Divine  Fatherhood  is  eternally  but  freely  realised ;  ^  and  by 
whom,  as  the  agent  of  creation,  the  rational  creature  is  made 
to  partake  of  the  Divine  Nature,  though  capable,  owing  to 
his  freedom,  of  falling  from  his  inheritance.  The  Word  of 
God,  then,  has  always  been  present  in  human  nature,  wherever 
the  true  Light  has  not  been  quenched  by  sin.  And  the  gleams 
of  truth  and  righteousness  which  have  shone  like  stars 
amid  the  night  of  Gentile  ignorance  and  guilt  have  been  the 
Divine  witnesses  to  the  Son  of  God,  which  find  at  once  their 
source  and  explanation  in  the  Incarnation  of  Jesus  Christ. 
Similarly  the  Jew  receiv^ed  in  the  Law  a  higher  but  still  partial 
illumination  of  God  the  Word,  which  he  indeed  misunderstood, 
but  which  Christ  expressly  connected  with  His  own  opera- 
tion among  the  chosen  people,  and  which  was  intended,  side 
by  side  with  Greek  philosophy,  as  a  preparatory  discipline  to 
open  man's  mind  to  Christ. 

The  same  thought  inspires  Origen,  the  great  disciple  of  a 
great  teacher.  He  certainly  corrupts  it  by  the  admixture  of 
hypotheses  as  to  the  origin  and  destiny  of  souls,  which  are 

^  The  word  freely  is  here  used  to  guard  against  the  theory  that  any 
eternal  necessity  surrounds  the  Divine  Fatherhood.  Clement  does  not 
attempt  to  analyse  the  manner  of  the  generation  of  the  Word.  But  as 
against  the  Gnostics  he  is  careful  to  maintain  the  Divine  freedom. 


28o  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

absent  from  Scripture  and  out  of  harmony  with  the  mind  of 
the  Church.  But  the  central  truth  that  man  is  made  for 
Grod,  and  by  his  likeness  to  God  becomes,  through  Christ, 
capable  of  knowing  God,  shines  out  in  his  writings  with 
peculiar  lustre,  and  forms  the  firm  foundation  of  his  apolo- 
getic argument.  The  highest  theological  expression  of  this 
principle  is  not  attained  until  Athanasius,i  who,  at  once  a 
master  of  dialectic  and  a  great  Church  ruler,  assigns  to  the 
Incarnation  once  for  all  its  true  place  in  human  history,  and 
also  guards  it  from  the  tinge  of  mystic  vagueness,  with  which 
Clement  and  Origen  allow  it  to  be  encircled. 

The  main  result  of  this  principle  is  seen  in  the  attitude 
assumed  by  this  school  of  apologists  towards  Judaism,  and 
still  more  towards  Pagan  philosophy.  The  preparation  for 
the  coming  of  Christ  has  been  not  negative  only,  but  positive. 
The  manifestation  of  God  in  human  form  came  not  as  an 
absolutely  new  fact  in  the  rational  universe,^  but  as  the  long- 
expected  fulfilment  of  the  desire  of  man's  heart,  the  reinstate- 
ment of  his  nature  in  its  true  position,  and  the  guarantee  of 
a  spiritual  progress  which  should  again  unite  man  to  God. 

A  second  class  of  apolog-ists,  which  also  numbers  many 
illustrious  names,  took  its  stand  upon  the  same  funda- 
mental truth,  but  refused  to  allow  any  progressive  move- 
ment in  human  history  towards  the  decisive  fact  of  the 
Incarnation.  It  preferred  to  dwell  on  the  advent  of  Christ 
as  a  sudden  break  in  the  Divine  dealings  with  mankind,  who 
had  fallen  wholly  back  from  original  righteousness,  and  who 
could  only  be  said  to  have  paved  the  way  for  Redemption 
by  manifesting  their  utter  incapacity  for  righteousness  and 
truth.     The  writers  of  this  class  admit  the  primordial  kinship 

^  Athanasius  first  connects  the  statement  of  the  Trinity  as  an  original 
fact  of  the  Divine  Essence  with  the  Incarnation  and  the  union  of  the^'two 
Natures  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  by  these  majestic  doctrines  he  vindicates  the 
essential  divineness  of  man's  nature. 

2  Two  mysterious  thoughts  were  ever  present  to  the  minds  of  the  great 
Greek  Fathers,  of  which  they  earnestly  strove  to  gather  the  significance 
— (i)  The  Image  of  God,  in  which  man  was  created ;  (2)  The  Theophanies 
or  appearances  of  a  Divine  Person  in  human  form  recorded  in  the  Old 
Testament. 


THE   DIFFERENT   CLASSES   OF  APOLOGISTS.      281 

between  the  human  soul  and  its  Maker,  but  recognise  it  only 
when  divested  of  all  the  trappings  and  disguises  with  which 
false  creeds  and  philosophies  have  tried  to  smother  it.  Some 
of  them  extend  their  condemnation  not  only  to  Paganism, 
but  also  to  the  Mosaic  law,  regarding  it  as  Divinely  ordained 
only  so  far  as  it  was  imposed  upon  a  disobedient  people  as  a 
23unishment  for  their  sins.  This  attitude,  which  is  first  taken 
by  Barnabas,  is  traceable  in  the  writings  of  Tatian,  Irenaeus, 
and  the  writer  to  Diognetus,^  and  to  a  less  extent  in  Tertullian. 
But  it  is  in  their  attitude  towards  heathen  thought  that  the 
second  class  of  apologists  differ  fundamentally  from  the  first. 
By  far  the  most  brilliant  of  them  is  Tertullian,  and  he  is  also 
the  most  typical.  He  will  not  allow  any  excellence  whatever 
in  Pagan  philosophy.  It  is  speculatively  false  and  practically 
immoral,  more  plausible,  no  doubt,  and  less  gross  than  Pagan 
religion,  but  none  the  less  demon-taught  and  soul-destroying. 
If  the  appeal  of  God  the  Word  to  the  human  soul  is  to 
have  any  response  at  all,  that  appeal  must  be  made  not  to 
the  soul  encrusted  with  the  cancer-growth  of  civilisation,  but 
to  the  soul  naked  and  untaught,  caught,  as  it  were,  unawares 
in  its  moments  of  infant  unconsciousness,  for  then  only  will  it 
bear  spontaneous  witness  to  its  divine  birth.  This  brilliant  and 
striking  thought  is  brought  out  with  startling  vividness  in 
Tertullian's  ''  Essay  on  the  Testimony  of  the  Soul  that  is 
naturally  Christian."  The  whole  progress  of  man's  mind 
since  the  fall,  with  the  single  exception  of  the  Jewish  faith, 
has  been  one  long  apostacy,  deviating  ever  more  and  more 
hopelessly  from  the  path  of  truth. 

This  line  of  reasoning  is  more  congenial  to  the  Latin 
Church  than  to  the  Greek,  and  it  is  by  Tertullian,  the  first 
Latin  theologian,  that  it  is  most  distinctly  grasped.  The 
weak  point  in  its  metaphysical  basis  is  the  position  assigned 
to  Judaism,  which  there  was  a  general  tendency  to  misre- 
present. In  the  heretic  Marcion,  who  offers  several  points 
of  contact  with  this   school,   this  tendency   was  carried  to 

^  In  this  unknown  writer  the  disparagement  of  Judaism  attains  its 
maximum.  According  to  him  it  differs  in  no  respect  from  heathenism, 
except  that  its  superstitions  happen  to  be  directed  towards  the  true  God. 


282  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

an  extreme  by  his  denying  the  Old  Testament  legislation 
to  be  the  work  of  the  good  God.  But  both  Tertullian  and 
Iren^eus  bestow  great  pains  on  fitting  in  the  Mosaic  dispensa- 
tion with  their  general  system ;  and  though  they  fall  below 
S.  Paul's  solution,  they  are  far  removed  from  those  of  Tatian 
and  the  writer  to  Diognetus. 

The  third  class  of  apologists,  of  whom  Arnobius  is  the 
representative,  proceed  upon  a  totally  different  fundamental 
assumption.  They  regard  man  exclusively  from  the  physical 
point  of  view,  and  deny  to  him  any  claim  to  kinship  with  God. 
Biassed  by  Gnostic  prejudice,  they  even  refuse  to  allow  him 
to  be  the  direct  work  of  God,  referring  his  creation  to  some 
intermediate  power.  The  redemptive  mission  of  God  the 
Son  becomes  an  isolated  supernatural  fact,  caused  indeed  by 
the  Divine  Love,  but  incomprehensible  to  us,  and  demanding 
only  our  humble,  adoring  acknowledgment.  It  appears  as  if 
it  might  have  been  effected  in  some  other  way  than  by  the 
Incarnation,  so  far  as  our  reasonable  apprehension  of  it  is 
concerned.  The  system  of  thought  here  inaugurated  is 
not  only  different  from  but  incompatible  with  that  of  the 
Greek  Fathers;  it  seeks  to  magnify  God  by  degrading 
man,  and,  like  Calvinism,  of  which  it  may  be  considered 
the  precursor,  it  shows  distinct  affinities  for  non-Christian 
modes  of  thought.  A  Mohammedan  may  speak  of  God  as 
the  All-merciful,  but  in  his  theology  this  does  not  mean 
that  the  Divine  heart  beats  with  loving  tenderness  for  the 
soul  that  proceeds  from  Him,  but  merely  that,  while  He 
has  the  power  and  the  right  to  destroy  a  guilty  creature. 
He  abstains  from  doing  so,  and  offers  him  instead  the  gift 
of  eternal  life. 

Arnobius  himself  has  no  claim  to  be  ranked  as  a  philo- 
sopher or  a  theologian.  Lactantius,  who  followed  on  some- 
what similar  lines,  though  a  thoughtful  reasoner,  does  not 
construct  a  complete  dogmatic  system.  But  their  influence  is 
not  altogether  absent  from  the  mind  of  their  great  successor 
S.  Augustine,  whose  tremendous  vindication  of  the  sovereign 
power  of  God  has  proved  a  two-edged  weapon,  and  imposed 
upon   the   conscience  of    Christendom   a    "  fearfulness    and 


THE  DIFFERENT  CLASSES   OF  APOLOGISTS.      283 

trembling "    which    has    interfered    disastrously    with    the 
"glorious  liberty  of  the  sons  of  God." 


Evidences  of  Christianity. 

The  Question  of  Christian  Evidences  is  that  on  which 
the  acceptance  of  Christianity  by  those  to  whom  it  is  for  the 
first  time  presented  necessarily  turns.  That  these  should 
refrain  from  persecuting,  should  be  benevolently  neutral,  does 
not  content  the  apologist;  he  is  aggressive,  and  urges  the  adop- 
tion of  his  faith.  The  Jewish  or  Greek  doubter  appeals  for 
proofs.  In  supplying  these,  the  Christian  may  lay  the  chief 
stress  either  on  the  inward  and  spiritual  form  of  evidence,  or 
on  the  23hysical  and  external.  The  former  addresses  itself  to 
the  conscience,  starting  from  the  ]3rinciple  that  like  is  known 
by  like  ;  the  latter  addresses  itself  to  the  understanding,  and 
convinces  by  shutting  the  op^Donent's  mouth.  Now,  these 
two  lines  of  proof  correspond  to  the  two  ways  of  regarding 
man's  nature  before  mentioned.  The  moral  or  spiritual 
proof  is  only  of  force  on  the  supposition  that  man's  con- 
science is  the  Divine  voice  'within  him,  that  his  spiritual 
retina  is  sensitive  to  the  light,  and  that  if  he  will  he  can 
discern  "  things  as  they  are."  The  essence  of  it  lies  in  its 
confidence  in  man's  freedom  ;  he  answers  because  he  hears 
distinctly. 

The  external  proof,  which  is  most  relied  on  and  most 
effective,  is  nevertheless  of  a  lower  order  of  cogency,  for  it 
reasons  with  its  opponent  as  a  sujoerior,  not  as  an  equal.  It 
impresses  not  only  the  intelligence,  but  also  the  emotional 
nature,  awakening  hopes  and  fears,  and  the  vague  awe  of  the 
supernatural.  Its  effect  is  therefore  more  striking,  and  its 
application  more  widespread.  At  bottom  it  rests  upon  the 
manifestation  of  superhuman  knowledge  or  power  coming 
from  without ;  and  so  does  not  differ  generically  from  the 
evidence  of  non-Christian  religions.  It  is  its  close  connec- 
tion with  the  moral  proof  which  gives  it  its  value,  its 
inestimable  value ;  for  Christianity  cannot  dispense  with 
external  evidence,  so  long  as  it  accepts  S.  Paul's  declaratioa 


284  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

that  "  if  Christ  be  not  risen  our  faith  is  vain."  The  Apostle's 
creed  lays  down  the  true  lines  on  which  an  evidential  system 
must  be  built.  It  gives  us  facts,  one  of  them  at  least  miracu- 
lous, to  be  explained ;  and  the  explanation  of  these  facts  is 
found  to  carry  with  it  that  regeneration  of  humanity  for 
which  the  world  had  been  longing  and  to  which  its  progress 
had  been  tending. 

A  full  and  consistent  presentation  of  Christianity  must 
rest  on  both  these  proofs,  but  not  in  an  equal  degree.  In 
combining  them,  either  the  physical  must  be  subordinated  to 
the  moral,  or  the  moral  to  the  physical.  In  either  case  one 
gives  its  value  to  the  other.  This  consistent  attitude  is, 
however,  rarely  maintained  by  any  one  Father.  Justin,  for 
instance,  in  his  Apology  rests  the  main  proof  of  Christ's 
doctrine  on  the  presence  of  the  Divine  Word  in  germ  in  the 
human  heart,  but  in  his  dialogue  with  Try^Dho  he  lays  greater 
stress  on  the  theophanies  and  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  the  miracles  of  the  New.  Tertullian,  in  his  most 
original  treatise,  founds  the  truth  of  Christianity  on  the 
witness  of  the  uncorrupted  human  soul,  yet  no  one  brings 
to  bear  with  greater  vividness  the  employment  of  portent  and 
terror,  of  Divine  Might  acting  out  of  the  course  of  nature,  in 
order  to  convince  an  unwilling  world.  Clement  is  the  most  con- 
sistent of  the  apologists ;  but  he  gains  simplicity  by  subordi- 
nating that  side  of  Christianity  for  which  external  i3roofs  are 
required,  namely,  the  redemptive  work  of  Christ  as  finished 
by  His  death.  Origen,  the  most  spiritually-minded  of  the 
Fathers,  does  more  justice  than  Clement  to  the  power  of  the 
proof  from  miracle,  though  he  restricts  its  province.  His 
point  of  view  is  that,  Jesus  Christ  having  once  been  appre- 
hended as  the  Divine  Incarnate  Word,  it  would  be  expected 
that  He  should  stand  in  a  different  relation  to  external  nature 
from  ordinary  mortals,  and  that  therefore  the  alleged  instances 
of  His  supernatural  power  are  both  in  themselves  credible, 
and,  by  their  ^perpetuation  in  a  weakened  form  to  his  own 
day,  bear  witness  to  their  greater  intensity  during  His  pre- 
sence on  earth. 

The  student  who  will  keep  before  him  the  two  lines  of 


THE   DIFFERENT   CLASSES   OF   APOLOGISTS.      285 

thought,  as  here  distinguished,  will  not  fail  to  obtain  an 
additional  help  towards  mastering  the  arguments  of  the 
great  apologetic  writers.  He  will  study  them  according  to 
their  spiritual  affinities  rather  than  according  to  accidental 
similarities. 

Next  to  the  fundamental  axiom  of  the  kinship  of  the 
Divine  and  human,  the  link  which  binds  the  first  school  of 
apologists  most  closely  together  is  the  influence  of  Plato. 
Hippolytus  alone  in  his  extant  works  shows  few  traces  of  it. 
Justin,  Athenagoras,  Clement,  and  Origen,  are  all  in  a  sense 
Platonists.  Justin's  Platonism  comes  out  in  his  views  on 
creation,  on  intermediate  spirits  or  demons,  and  especially 
on  the  nature  and  attributes  of  the  One  God.  Athenagoras 
shows  traces  of  another  side  of  Plato's  mind,  in  his  apprecia- 
tion of  a  sceptical  balance  of  judgment,  which  he  refuses  to 
condemn  so  long  as  it  is  not  caused  by  moral  obliquity,  and 
is  really  searching  after  truth. 

The  Alexandrian  Fathers  are  steeped  in  Plato,  to  an 
extent,  indeed,  that  interferes  with  the  proportion  of  their 
faith.  The  absolute  self-sufficingness  of  the  Eternal  God, 
the  distrust  of  matter,  the  idealistic  presentation  (at  least 
by  Origen)  of  Christ's  humanity,  the  imperfect  separation  of 
the  spiritual  and  intellectual  spheres,  and  the  presentation 
of  Christ's  redemption  rather  as  a  revelation  ((jycoTLajuLog) 
whereby  the  eye  of  man's  soul  is  turned  round  to  the  light 
and  lovingly  contemplates  the  Divine,  than  as  an  atonement 
whereby  an  alienated  humanity  is  restored  to  its  original 
destiny : — all  these,  and  many  other  features  of  their  system, 
which  will  be  noticed  in  due  course,  are  drawn  rather  from 
the  fountain  of  Plato's  genius  than  from  the  pure  tradition 
of  the  Gospel. 

The  greatest  masters  of  the  second  school  are  either  unin- 
fluenced by  the  Platonic  philosophy,  or  have  broken  with  it 
and  freed  themselves  from  its  tendencies.  Tatian  had  drunk 
deep  of  Greek  thought,  but  he  seems  to  have  always  been 
dissatisfied  with  it,  and  to  have  rejoiced  in  throwing  it  over- 
board. Irenaeus  stands  midway  between  the  Greek  and  Latin 
modes  of  thought,  but  he  is  far  more  of  a  divine  than  of  a 


286  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

philosopher.  Tertullian's  mind,  though  caj^able  of  abstract 
thought,  and  moving  with  ease  in  the  most  subtle  dialectic, 
has  more  affinity  with  the  materialising  views  of  the  Stoics 
than  with  the  metaphysic  of  idealism.  Cyprian,  who  suc- 
ceeded him,  displays  a  mind  still  more  restrictedly  rhetorical 
and  forensic.  The  cosmical  views  of  Plato  are  traceable  in 
the  works  of  Arnobius  and  Lactantius,  but  the  spirit  of  their 
systems  is  wholly  anti-Platonic. 

The  canon  of  truth  in  all  the  apologists  is  the  same, 
namely,  the  teaching  of  Christ  and  His  apostles  preserved 
in  the  written  evangelical  records  and  in  the  general  tradi- 
tion of  the  Church.  None  of  the  great  writers,  even  while 
expatiating  in  the  realms  of  transcendental  theology  or  of 
man's  free-will,  ever  willingly  adopts  any  conclusion  which 
he  believes  to  be  inconsistent  with  this  Catholic  tradition. 

But  while  both  the  great  schools  of  thought  agree  in  ac- 
cepting this  as  the  supreme  arbiter,  they  differ  widely  in  their 
conception  of  its  mode  of  application.  To  the  first  school 
the  revelation  of  Christ  is  conceived  as  a  self-manifesting 
process,  in  conformity  with  the  workings  of  reason,  freely 
moving  among  the  ^^henomena  of  spiritual  truth.  The  tradi- 
tion of  the  Church  is  regarded  as  true  because  the  expounders 
of  it  were  more  fully  under  the  guidance  of  the  enlightening 
Spirit,  and  their  statements  commend  themselves  more  and 
more  fully,  in  proportion  as  they  are  understood,  to  the 
purified  conscience  in  which  the  same  Spirit  has  awakened 
the  power  of  discernment.  Christ  is  the  fulfilment  not  only 
of  .the  Law — i.e.,  of  the  spiritual  progress  of  the  chosen 
race — but  of  humanity  as  such,  with  all  its  imperfect  aspira- 
tions, all  its  guesses  at  truth.  He  is  acknowledged  by  the 
free  exercise  of  a  mind  touched  by  His  grace. 

To  the  other  school  the  apostolic  teaching  assumes  a  more 
directly  authoritative  aspect.  Ireneeus  defines  true  doctrine  to 
be  the  uncorrupted,  unvarying  testimony  of  those  churches 
which  were  founded  by  apostles,  and  had  continuously  retained 
the  deposit  of  truth  once  committed  to  them.  And  Tertullian 
goes  so  far  as  to  declare  that  their  teaching,  even  though 
incredible,  is  binding  on  faith:   "Credo  quia  impossibile." 


THE  DIFFERENT  CLASSES  OF  APOLOGISTS.      287 

The  domain  of  human  freedom  is  here  reduced  to  the  power 
of  accepting  or  rejecting  that  which  the  Catholic  Church 
declares,  on  pain  of  eternal  loss,  to  be  Christian  truth.  It  is 
evident,  therefore,  that  between  these  two  points  of  view 
there  is  at  bottom  an  irreconcilable  difference.  The  one 
reads  Divine  truth  in  the  human  spirit  as  taught  by  Christ 
and  born  again  in  Christ ;  the  other  looks  on  truth  as  a  gift 
from  heaven,  of  which  man  as  such  is  the  passive  recipient. 
The  latter  view,  which  was  definitely  accepted  by  the  Latin 
Church,  is  unquestionably  the  better  fitted  to  secure  the 
obedience  of  mankind.  But  it  needs  the  periodical  refresh- 
ment of  the  earlier  and  more  philosophic  standpoint  if  man's 
highest  intellect  is  to  be  led  as  a  willing  captive  by  the 
triumphal  car  of  Him  who  guide?  us  into  all  truth. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  EA RLIEST  A POLOGISTS—ARISTIDES—QUA DRA  TUS 
—AGRIPPA   CASTOR— ARISTO  PELLAEUS. 

We  have  grouped  together  in  this  chapter  four  writers  who 
until  recently  were  little  more  than  names  to  us,  but  who, 
from  their  admitted  antiquity  and  philosophical  pretensions, 
hold  a  high  j^lace  in  the  annals  of  the  Church. 

These  are  Quadratus  and  Aristides,  Agrippa  Castor  and 
Aristo  of  Pella.  The  first  two  have  much  in  common. 
Both  were  of  Athens,  both  philosophers  (the  former  perhaps 
also  a  bishop),  and  both  authors  of  apologies  believed  to  be 
addressed  to  Hadrian  and  described  as  highly  important  for 
the  Christian  cause.  A  few  brief  notices  of  their  works  were 
collected  by  the  industry  of  Eouth,  the  most  circumstantial 
being,  as  usual,  those  of  Eusebius.  The  impression  derived 
from  these  would  be  that  these  two  writers  were  remarkable 
examples  of  intellectual  power  and  philosophic  acumen,  as 
well  as  staunch  defenders  of  the  faith. 

An  opportunity  of  testing  the  value  of  this  criticism  has 
been  afforded  in  the  case  of  one  of  them,  Aristides  (whom, 
though  generally  placed  after  Quadratus,  it  will  be  con- 
venient to  consider  first),  through  a  remarkable  series  of 
discoveries  in  which  nothing  is  more  noteworthy  than  the 
promise  it  gives  of  similar  discoveries  in  the  future.  For 
it  turns  out  that,  as  we  had  all  along  had  Tatian's  Diatessaron 
in  our  hands  without  suspecting  it,  so  we  had  been  equally  the 
unconscious  possessors  of  the  Apology  of  Aristides.  The  re- 
covery of  this  work  has  excited  so  much  interest,  and  is  so  good 
an  example  of  the  patient  industry  of  scholars  and  the  chances 
offered  to  those  who  know  how  to  use  them,  that  we  propose  to 
give  a  very  brief  account  of  the  way  in  which  it  came  about. i 

1  Taken  from  Rendel  Harris'  edition  of  Aristides  (Cambridge  Texts  and 
Studies). 


ARISTIDES.  289 

Some  fourteen  years  ago  the  learned  Armenian  monks  of 
the  Mechitarist  convent  of  S.  Lazarus  at  Venice,  who  had 
done  such  excellent  service  in  publishing  the  Armenian 
version  of  Tatian,  issued  to  the  world  an  Armenian  trans- 
lation of  the  opening  chapters  of  the  lost  Apology  of  Aris- 
tides,  accompanied  by  a  Latin  version.  The  fragment  was 
so  different  from  the  preconceived  ideas  formed  of  it,  that 
able  critics,  and  among  them  M.  Renan,  unhesitatingly  pro- 
nounced it  spurious.  Relying  on  the  testimony  of  Eusebius 
as  to  its  date,  and  of  Jerome  as  to  the  talent  of  the  author 
and  his  frequent  citation  of  heathen  philosophers,  the  French 
critic  had  no  difficulty  in  showing  that  the  work  published 
was  deficient  in  talent,  and  entirely  without  allusions  to 
philosophy ;  that  its  mythological  knowledge  was  unworthy 
of  its  reputed  author,  while  its  theological  phraseology  was 
three  centuries  too  late. 

In  spite  of  this  sweeping  rejection  by  so  high  an  authority, 
the  fragment  was  found  to  be  authentic  after  all ;  and  theo- 
logy has  again  to  thank  the  Armenian  monks  for  the  first 
instalment  of  an  invaluable  gift.  Mr.  R.  Harris,  late  of 
Cambridge,  now  of  Philadelphia,  while  travelling  in  Syria  in 
1889,  discovered  in  the  convent  of  S.  Catherine  on  Mount 
Sinai  a  Syriac  manuscript,  containing  a  practically  complete 
translation  of  the  whole  of  the  missing  Apology.  This  was 
in  sufficient  accord  with  the  Armenian  fragment  to  vindi- 
cate its  substantial  genuineness,  while,  by  its  omission  of  the 
fifth  century  theological  terms,  it  showed  that  M.  Renan's 
objections  to  the  Armenian  had  not  been  altogether  without 
weight.  It  proved  further  the  erroneousness  of  Jerome's 
laudatory  criticism,  and  prepared  the  way  for  doubts  as  to  the 
accuracy  of  the  date  he  assigned. 

Mr.  Harris  thus  characterises  the  Syrian  document : — "  The 
language  and  thought  of  the  writer  are  simple  and  straight- 
forward ;  in  fact  he  is  more  of  a  child  than  a  philosopher,  a 
child  well  trained  in  creed  and  well  practised  in  ethics, 
rather  than  either  a  dogmatist  defending  a  new  system  or 
an  iconoclast  destroying  an  old  one  ;  but  this  simplicity  of 
treatment,  so  far  from  being  a  weakness,  adds  often  greatly  to 

T 


290  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

the  natural  impressiveness  of  the  subject,  and  gives  the  work 
a  place  by  the  side  of  the  best  Christian  writings  of  his  age." 

We  now  come  to  the  strange  part  of  the  history.  While  Mr. 
Harris  was  passing  his  Syriac  MS.  through  the  press  he  showed 
the  proofs  to  Mr.  Armitage  Eobinson,  the  editor  of  the  "  Cam- 
bridge Texts  and  Studies  contributing  to  the  illustration  of 
Biblical  literature."  This  eminent  scholar,  while  shortly  after- 
wards perusing  in  Vienna  a  Latin  version  of  an  old  romance, 
called  "The  History  of  Barlaam  and  Joasaph  (or  Josaphat)," 
was  struck  with  the  resemblance  of  a  portion  of  this  to 
the  Apology  of  Aristides.  The  Greek  text  of  the  "  History  " 
is  printed  in  Migne's  edition  of  the  works  of  S.  John  of 
Damascus,  and  Mr.  Eobinson  soon  found  himself  reading 
the  actual  words  of  the  apologist  himself,  transferred  bodily 
into  the  History  as  a  defence  of  Christianity  delivered  by 
Barlaam  before  the  Indian  monarch  Abenner  and  his  son 
Joasaph.^  As  this  work  exists  in  several  copies  and  nume- 
rous versions,  a  new  field  of  criticism  of  the  Apology  was 
opened  up  to  the  student,  which  will  doubtless  prove  highly 
fruitful.  Sufficient  to  say,  that  the  restored  Greek  text  is, 
on  the  whole,  in  fairly  close  accord  with  the  Syriac,  though 
the  latter,  in  accordance  with  the  usual  habit  of  Syriac 
versions,  contains  amplifications  and  insertions,  and  circum- 
locutions for  the  sake  of  avoiding  difficulties.  We  may 
therefore  feel  tolerably  certain  that  we  possess  this  ancient 
and  much  valued  Apology  entire,  and  a  few  brief  remarks 
will  now  be  made  upon  its  main  features. 

The  first  thing  that  strikes  one  is  that  it  must  have  enjoyed 
a  great  reputation.  This  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  Jerome 
and  the  author  of  the  Roman  Martyrology,  influenced  by  popu- 
lar opinion,  perceive  in  it  excellences  it  does  not  possess.^ 

1  The  work  in  question  is  a  religious  romance  long  attributed  to  S.  John 
of  Damascus,  but  probably  much  earlier,  and  now  recognised  to  be  a 
working  up  of  the  Indian  legend  of  Sakja  Mouni  or  Buddha,  with  other 
ancient  Eastern  tales  incorporated  into  it.  It  was  immensely  popular 
during  the  Middle  Ages,  and  translated  into  most  of  the  European  lan- 
guages.    The  reader  will  find  all  details  in  the  Dictionary  of  Biography. 

-  It  is  worth  while  to  observe  the  growing  amplitude  of  language  em- 
ployed.    Eusebius,  while  mentioning  the  work  as  extant  in  his  own  day, 


ARISTIDES.  291 

The  selection  of  it  by  the  author  of  Barlaam  and  Josaphat 
out  of  the  multitude  of  apologies  open  to  him  is  still  stronger 
testimony  to  its  fame.  And  if  Mr.  Harris'  comparison 
of  some  of  its  views  with  those  singled  out  for  attack  by  the 
heathen  Celsus  be  sufficient  to  prove  that  Celsus  had  it 
specially  in  his  mind  when  he  wrote  against  the  Christian 
faith,  we  may  be  quite  certain  that  it  stood  out  prominently 
among  its  fellows  as  a  recognised  standard  work.  That  it 
should  have  been  so  considered  is  not  altogether  unreasonable; 
for  it  has  some  merits  of  its  own,  rare  among  patristic  writings. 
First,  it  is  brief,  simple,  and  to  the  point ;  secondly,  it  deals 
systematically  with  the  opinions  of  the  different  races  of  men, 
dividing  them  into  Barbarians,  Greeks,  Jews,  and  Christians, 
and  taking  each  in  order  ;  thirdly,  while  contenting  itself 
with  a  bare  statement  of  doctrine,  it  brings  into  clear  light 
the  two  dogmas  most  easily  assailed  by  a  heathen,  that  of  the 
divinity  of  Christ,  and  that  of  Man  being  the  final  cause  of 
creation.  This  last  is  mercilessly  ridiculed  by  Celsus ;  and 
though  it  is  found  also  in  Justin  (whom  Jerome  declares  to 
have  been  an  imitator  of  Aristides),  yet  most  probably  Celsus 
got  it  from  the  latter. 

One  highly  interesting  feature  of  this  Apology  is  the  evi- 
dence it  affords  of  an  already  formulated  Christian  creed.  Mr. 
Harris  thus  restores  the  fragments  in  their  proper  order : — 

"  We  believe  in  one  God,  Almighty 
Maker  of  Heaven  and  Earth  : 
And  in  Jesns  Christ,  His  Son 

Born  of  the  Virgin  Mary  : 

He  was  pierced  by  the  Jews  : 
He  died  and  was  buried  : 
•  The  third  day  He  rose  again  : 

He  ascended  into  Heaven  : 

He  is  about  to  come  to  judge 


uses  no  term  of  praise. — H.  E.  iv.  3  fin.  Jerome  speaks  of  the  author  as 
"  philosophus,  vir  eloquentissimus  ; "  the  author  of  the  Martyrology  as 
"  sanctus  Aristides,  fide  et  sapientia  clarissimus." 


292  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

That  these  clauses  formed  the  whole  Creed  is  not  likely : 
but  in  one  resj^ect  they  point  to  a  very  ancient  date.  The 
clause  "pierced  by  the  Jews,"  which  never  occurs  in  any  of 
the  third  century  symbols,  contains  a  point  emphasised  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  traceable  in  the  apocry^^hal  Gospel  and 
Preaching  of  Peter  and  the  Gnostic  Acts  of  S.  John,  all  early 
documents.  And  oddly  enough,  it  appears  here  in  conjunc- 
tion with  a  far  more  friendly  attitude  to  the  Jewish  people 
than  was  usual  in  later  times.  It  is  necessary  therefore  to 
carry  back  the  Apology  to  as  early  a  date  as  is  compatible 
with  the  histoiical  evidence.  Eusebius  speaks  of  it  as 
delivered  to  Hadrian,  who  visited  Athens  in  a.d.  125  and 
again  in  129.  But  the  recovered  inscription  makes  it  certain 
that  the  Emperor  addressed  was  not  Hadrian  but  Antoninus 
Pius,  and  that  the  prsenomen  of  Aristides  was  Marcianus. 
Now  this  name  is  otherwise  known  as  that  of  a  Christian  of 
great  authority  in  Smyrna  about  A.D.  138-140.  On  a  review 
of  the  probabilities,  Mr.  Harris  concludes  that  the  Apology 
should  be  assigned  to  the  early  part  of  Antoninus'  reign, 
and  that  it  was  possibly  presented  to  him,  along  with  other 
Christian  writings,  during  an  unrecorded  visit  of  his  to  his 
ancient  seat  of  government  in  Smyi-na. 

The  notices  of  Quadratus,  the  companion-apologist  to 
Aristides,  are  somewhat  more  exact,  but  it  seems  doubtful 
whether  they  are  founded  on  any  more  certain  data.  Euse- 
bius says :  ^ — 

"  Quadratus  presented  an  Apology  to  Hadrian,  which  he  wrote 
in  defence  of  our  faith,  because  certain  ill-disposed  persons  tried  to 
injure  our  people.  The  oration  is  still  extant  and  in  our  posses- 
sion :  we  can  judge  from  it  the  writer's  talent  and  the  correctness 
of  his  apostolic  doctrine.  The  writer  sufficiently  attests  his 
early  date  by  the  following  words  :  '  Our  Saviour's  works  were 
always  present,  for  they  were  true  :  those  who  were  healed,  those 
who  had  risen  from  the  dead  :  who  were  also  ever  present.  Nor 
only  during  the  Saviour's  lifetime,  but  after  His  departure  did 
they  live  a  long  time,  so  that  some  of  them  have  remained  even 
to  our  own  day.'  " 

1  Eus.  H.  E.  iv.  3. 


QUADRATUS.  293 

The  chief  difficulty  in  accepting  the  remote  date  thus 
claimed  for  Quadratus  lies  in  another  passage  of  Eusebius,^ 
which  refers  to  a  letter  of  Dionysius  of  Corinth  in  the  time 
of  Antoninus,  which  speaks  of  Quadratus  as  succeeding  to 
the  see  of  Athens  after  the  martyrdom  of  Publius,  when  the 
Church  was  scattered  by  persecution.  If  Quadratus  the 
apologist  and  Quadratus  the  bishop  are  the  same  person,  it 
seems  impossible  to  believe  that  Dionysius  could  have  been 
mistaken  as  to  the  time,  and  Quadratus  must  therefore  be 
brought  down  to  the  early  years  of  Antoninus.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  account  of  Eusebius  is  so  precise,  and  the  quota- 
tion itself  so  graphic  and  explicit,  that  it  seems  best  to  admit 
the  existence  of  two  Quadratuses,  the  first  an  apologist  under 
Hadrian,  the  second  a  bishop  under  Antoninus.^ 

There  would  be  no  doubt  whatever  as  to  Quadratus'  early 
date,  if  the  details  given  in  S.  Jerome's  biography  could  be 
trusted.  But  that  great  writer,  so  learned  and  acute-minded 
in  controversy,  contents  himself  for  the  most  part  in  bio- 
graphy with  working  up  into  a  more  elegant  literary  shape 
the  facts  supplied  by  Eusebius.  When  he  appears  to  be 
giving  additional  details,  one  often  finds  that  these  when 
analysed  can  be  traced  to  some  Eusebian  notice,  hint  or  allu- 
sion. Otherwise  his  account  of  Quadratus  is  precise  enough. 
"  Quadratus,  a  disciple  of  the  Apostles,  after  Publius  Bishop 
of  Athens  had  been  crowned  by  martyrdom,  was  elected  in 
his  place,  and  by  his  faith  and  industry  reunited  the  church, 
which  the  terror  of  persecution  had  dispersed.  When  Had- 
rian wintered  at  Athens  and  visited  Eleusis,  having  been 
initiated  into  almost  all  the  heathen  mysteries,  this  gave 
occasion  to  such  as  hated  the  Christians  to  harass  them 
without  receiving  an  imperial  order.  Quadratus  submitted 
to  him  a  most  telling  apologetic  treatise,  full  of  reason  and 
faith  and  worthy  of  his  apostolic  teaching,"  &c. 

In  another  passage  taken  from  the  Chronicon  of  Eusebius, 
Jerome  says  that  Quadratus  and  Aristides  sent  their  Apologies 

1  Eus.  H.  E.  iv.  23. 

'-  The  chief  difficulty  of  the  hypothesis  lies  in  this  absence  of  any  other 
testimony  for  a  persecution  at  Athens  under  Hadrian  :  whereas  that  under 
Antoninus  is  attested  also  by  Melito. 


294  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

to  Hadrian,  and  that  Serenus  Granius,  the  Legatus,  himself 
wrote  in  the  same  sense  :  whereby  Hadrian  was  so  much 
moved  that  he  sent  a  rescript  to  Miniicius  Fiindanus,  Pro- 
consul of  Asia,  laying  down  that  the  Christians  were  not  to 
be  condemned  without  certified  charges.  This  rescript  is 
preserved  in  Justin's  Apology  and  in  the  Chronicon  and 
History  of  Eusebius.  There  seems  no  reason  to  doubt  its 
genuineness  :  for  it  follows  in  the  line  of  Trajan,  forbidding 
clamorous  and  irresponsible  accusations,  but  ordering  Chris- 
tians to  be  punished  if  proved  to  have  done  anything  against 
the  laws.  Justin  places  too  mild  an  interpretation  upon  it, 
in  conformity  with  his  charitable,  hopeful  nature. 

The  next  writer  we  have  to  notice  is  Ag'rippa  Castor, 
whom  Eusebius  mentions  as  a  celebrated  opponent  of  the 
heretic  Basilides.^  He  wrote  under  Hadrian  probably  about 
A.D.  135,  and  is  the  earliest  recorded  controversialist  against 
heresy.  He  exposed  the  grandiloquent  terminology  of  Basi- 
lides,  especially  ridiculing  his  imaginaiy  prophets  Barcabbas 
and  Barcoph  (or  Parchor)  and  his  mystic  name  for  the 
Supreme  Deity  Abrasax  (or  Abraxas).  Of  the  method  of  his 
treatise  we  know  nothing,  but  we  may  infer  that  it  enjoyed 
a  wide  reputation. 

Another  writer  of  this  period  was  Aristo  of  Pella,  of 
whom,  however,  the  scanty  notices  that  remain  are  somewhat 
conflicting.  Eusebius  quotes  him  as  an  authority  for  Hadrian's 
having  forbidden  the  Jews,  after  the  suppression  of  Bar- 
cochba's  revolt,  to  settle  in  or  near  Jerusalem.  But  he  does 
not  say  to  what  work  of  Aristo  he  is  alluding.-  Maximus, 
in  commenting  on  the  work  on  Mystical  Theology  ascribed 
to  Dionysius  the  Areopagite,^  declares  him  to  be  the  author 
of  a  Dialogue  between  Jason  and  Papiscus,  which,  he  says, 
Clement  of  Alexandria  ascribed  to  S.  Luke.  If  this  reference 
to  Clement  be  correct,  the  work  must  have  been  ^^roduced  at 
a  very  early  date.  Jerome  twice  mentions  the  Dialogue  by 
name,  but  without  naming  the  author  ;  and  Origen  quotes 
Celsus  as  having  read  it,  but  he  too  is  silent  as  to  the 
author's  name.  Some  critics  have  doubted  whether  we  have 
1  Eus.  H.  E.  iv.  7.         2  Eus.  H.  E.  iv.  6.         ^  Routli,  Eel.  Sac,  vol.  i.  p.  96. 


ARISTO.  295 

suflScient  evidence  to  connect  the  work  with  Aristo  at  all ; 
but  this  scepticism  is  unnecessary.  The  two  fragments 
quoted  by  Jerome  are  (i)  ''He  that  hangeth  is  a  reproach  of 
God,^'  ^  alluding  to  the  current  Jewish  objection  to  a  crucified 
Messiah  ;  and  (2)  "  In  the  Son  God  made  heaven  and  earth"  ^ 
which,  he  says,  is  an  inaccurate  representation  of  the  Hebrew 
sentence,  ''In  the  heginning  God  created  the  heavens  and  the 
earth." 

The  dialogue  was  su23posed  to  be  held  between  Papiscus,. 
an  unconverted  Jew,  and  Jason,  a  Christian,  or  perhaps  a 
converted  Jew.  Celsus,  who  read  it,  dismisses  it  with  the 
contemptuous  remark  "that  it  is  worthy  not  so  much  of 
laughter  as  of  pity  and  indignation."  ^  Origen  does  not 
offer  a  very  warm  defence  of  the  writer,  but  he  deprecates 
Celsus'  criticism  as  misleading  and  unjust,  begging  the  reader 
to  judge  for  himself  by  a  perusal  of  the  book,  and  excusing 
its  superficiality  by  remarking  that  its  purpose  was  rather  to 
confirm  the  faith  of  believers  than  to  convince  an  intelligent 
opponent. 

It  was  translated  into  Latin  by  another  Celsus,  whose 
preface  is  still  extant,  and  used  to  be  appended  to  the  works 
of  Cyprian.  The  fragment  is  given  in  Kouth,  and  is  here 
translated  for  the  benefit  of  the  reader  : — 

"  There  comes  into  my  mind  that  great,  memorable  and  glori- 
ous discussion  between  the  Hebrew  Christian  Jason  and  Papiscus 
the  Alexandrian  Jew,  how  the  obstinate  hardness  of  the  Jewish 
heart  was  softened  by  admonition  and  gentle  reproof,  and  Jason's 
doctrine,  by  the  infusion  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  won  the  victory  in  the 
heart  of  Papiscus.  By  it  Papiscus  was  admitted  to  an  understand- 
ing of  the  truth  and  fashioned  to  the  fear  of  the  Lord  by  the  Lord's 
own  mercy,  so  that  he  believed  in  Jesus  Christ  the  Son  of  God,  and 
entreated  Jason  that  he  might  receive  the  sign  of  baptism.  This 
is  attested  by  the  written  narrative  of  their  contest,  which  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  Greek  language,  showing  how  they  strove  with  one 
another,  Papiscus  withstanding  the  truth,  and  Jason  maintain- 
ing and  vindicating  the  dispensation*  and  fulness  of  Christ." 

1  XoiSopia  Qeov  6  Kpeixdjxevos.     Jer.  lib.  11.  Comm.  Gal.  cap.  ill.  comm,  13. 

Routh.  -  Jer.  Qusest.  Heb.  in  Genesln.,  torn  11.  op.,  p.  507. — Routh. 

3  Origen  contra  Cels.  iv.  oh.  52. 

^  Dispositionem.     Others  translate  "  commission." 


CHAPTEE  IV. 

EARLY  APOLOGETIC  WRITERS  CONTINUED  .—ATHENA- 
GORAS  — EPISTLE  TO  DIOGNETUS —  DIONYSIUS  OF 
CORINTH— MAXIMUS—THEOPHILUS. 

We  have  already  noticed  how  two  champions  of  the  faith 
arose  in  Athens  to  testify  to  the  vitality  of  8.  Paul's  work 
there,  A  third  writer  now  comes  before  us  from  the  same 
capital,  superior  to  them  both  in  culture  and  intelligence, 
though,  strange  to  say,  little  spoken  of  in  the  annals  of  the 
Church.  We  allude  to  Athenag'oras,  whose  Aioology  and 
Treatise  on  the  Resurrection  still  remain  to  us,  and  are  highly 
favourable  specimens  of  his  controversial  method. 

Before  criticising  them,  it  may  be  w^ell  to  pause  a  moment 
and  consider  the  difficulties  which  must  have  beset  the 
planting  of  the  Church  in  Athens. 

If  the  burning  zeal  of  the  great  Apostle  ever  permitted 
him  to  feel  diffidence  in  addressing  an  assembly,  he  may  well 
have  felt  it  when  he  addressed  on  Mars'  Hill  for  the  first 
time  an  Athenian  crowd.  No  doubt  the  Athens  of  his 
time  was  in  her  decay,  inferior  in  opulence  and  grandeur 
to  many  younger  cities.  Yet  even  to  a  Jew,  provided  he 
had  received  some  educational  impressions  beyond  the 
fanatical  shibboleths  of  Pharisaism,  there  was  much  in 
that  wonderful  centre  of  intelligence  to  shake  his  most 
inveterate  prejudices  and  inspire  him  with  unwilling 
respect. 

Shorn  indeed  of  her  political  greatness,  deprived  even  of 
her  philosophical  supremacy,  she  still  shone  with  a  brilliant 
after-glow  of  aesthetic  and  intellectual  prestige.  Her  monu- 
ments flashed    on   the  visitor   memories   recent  enough  to 

dazzle  his  imagination.     Her  schools  claimed  and  obtained 

296 


ATHENAGORAS.  297 

even  from  Emperors  the  homage  due  to  her  unique  past. 
Recognising  her  as  the  true  nurse  of  Hellenism  and  the  chief 
missionary  of  human  refinement,  the  best  spirits  of  the  age 
held  her  worthy  of  admiring  love  not  unmixed  with  awe. 
As  the  seat  of  the  most  brilliant  and  popular  university, 
young  men  of  talent  and  position  flocked  to  her  from  every 
quarter,  studied  for  a  time  within  her  colonnades,  and 
carried  thence  the  recollection  of  a  culture  which  was  not 
always  deep,  not  always  erudite,  but  was  always  and 
genuinely  Attic. 

To  subject  to  the  criticism  of  this  people  a  doctrine  pro- 
fessing to  come  direct  from  God,  a  religion  and  not  a  philo- 
sophy, depending  not  on  argument  but  on  revelation,  was  a 
task  of  which  tlie  difficulties  might  seem  insuperable.  When 
we  consider  what  the  Athenian  character  was,  this  language 
will  not  seem  exaggerated.  Keen,  subtle,  capricious,  satirical, 
sated  with  ideas,  eager  for  novelty,  yet  with  the  eagerness 
of  amused  frivolity,  not  of  the  truth-seeker:  critical  by 
instinct,  exquisitely  sensitive  to  the  ridiculous  or  the  absurd, 
disputatious,  ready  to  listen,  yet  impatient  of  all  that  was 
not  wit,  satisfied  with  everything  in  life  except  its  shortness, 
and  therefore  hiding  all  references  to  this  unwelcome  fact 
imder  a  veil  of  complacent  euphemism — where  could  a  more 
uncongenial  soil  be  found  for  the  seed  of  the  Gospel  ?  Had 
the  Apostle  been  susceptible  of  moral  doubt,  he  might  well 
have  experienced  a  momentary  misgiving.  Imagine  a  zealot 
of  the  Salvationists  mounting  the  pulpit  of  S.  Mary's  Oxford 
on  Show-Sunday,  and  we  can  form  a  faint  idea  of  what  the 
frequenters  of  Athenian  lecture -halls  thought  of  S.  Paul. 
Yet  even  this  comparison  falls  far  short  of  the  mark.  To 
an  Athenian  the  Jew  was  not  so  much  an  object  of  hatred 
(as  to  the  Eoman),  nor  even  of  contempt  (as  to  the  rest  of 
mankind),  as  of  absolute  indiff'erence.  He  was  simply  ignored. 
To  the  eclectic  philosophy  which  now  dominated  the  schools 
of  Athens,  Judaism  alone  among  all  human  opinions  was  as  if 
non-existent.  That  Athenians  should  be  convinced  by  the 
philosophy  of  a  Jew  would  l)e  a  proposition  expressible  in 
words  but  wholly  destitute  of  meaning. 


298  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Jew  was  not  altogether  uninfluenced 
by  Greek  thought.  Wide  apart  as  the  two  minds  were,  the 
Hebraic  proved  not  insensible  to  the  charm  of  the  Hellenic ; 
witness  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  witness  Philo,  witness 
the  intrusion  of  Greek  methods  of  interpretation  even  into 
the  text-books  of  Eabbinism.  And  it  was  Athens,  as  the 
quintessence  of  Hellas,  Athens  as  represented  by  Socrates, 
and  still  more  by  Plato,  which  had  gained  this  subtle  power. 
And  just  as  Judaea  alone  among  all  the  Jewish  communities 
retained  its  exclusiveness  wholly  unimpaired  by  Hellenism, 
so  Athens,  more  than  any  Pagan  capital,  was  likely  to  ignore 
or  repel  a  faitli  coming  in  the  garb  of  Judaism.  And  yet 
within  less  than  a  century  we  find  this  faith  so  well  estab- 
lished there  as  to  yield  to  the  Church  the  good  fruits  of 
martyrdom  in  the  person  of  its  bishop,  and  of  al)le  defences 
in  the  person  of  three  of  its  teachers. 

The  early  and  the  later  fortunes  of  the  Athenian  Church 
are  buried  in  oblivion  ;  it  comes  but  for  a  brief  period  before 
the  scene  of  history.  But  the  undying  interest  of  that  one 
dramatic  moment  when  Paul  proclaimed  a  bodily  resurrec- 
tion to  the  authors  of  the  conception  of  a  spiritual  immortality, 
will  always  cause  us  to  linger  with  strange  sympathy  over 
every  relic  of  the  Christianity  of  Athens. 

Of  the  personal  history  of  Athenagoras  we  know  next  to 
nothing.  Philip  of  Side,  a  very  inaccurate  writer  of  the  fifth 
century,  says  that  he  was  the  first  head  of  the  school  at 
Alexandria,  that  he  was  converted  to  Christianity  while 
wearing  the  philosopher's  cloak  and  presiding  over  the 
academic  school,  and  from  a  zealous  impugner  became  an 
ardent  defender  of  the  Christian  faith.  These  statements, 
with  the  exception  of  the  first,  may  not  improbably  be 
true,  but  the  date  assigned  by  Philip  is  contradicted  by  the 
Apology  itself,  which  is  clearly  addressed  to  M.  Aurelius 
and  his  son  Commodus,  as  joint  rulers  of  the  world,  and 
by  several  allusions  enables  us  to  fix  the  time  of  writing  to 
A.D.  176-177. 

The  style  of  the  treatise  proves  the  education  of  the  writer, 
and  the  clearness  and  vigour  of  the  arguments  shows  his 


ATHENAGORAS.  299 

intelligence.  He  calls  the  work  an  Eiiibassij}  which  may 
indicate  that  he  was  in  possession  of  some  formal  introduc- 
tion to  the  Emperor.  At  any  rate,  he  writes  with  a  practical 
object,  in  the  anticipation  of  securing  Caesar's  attention. 

His  main  purpose  is  energetically  to  repel  the  three  stand- 
ing charges  against  the  Christians,  of  atheism,  incest,  and 
cannibalism,  and  also  to  state,  in  a  way  intelligiljle  to 
heathens,  the  main  outlines  of  the  Christian  creed.  His 
theology  closely  resembles  that  of  Justin :  God  the  Father 
is  conceived  of  mainly  as  the  self-subsisting  Being  and  Cause 
of  all  existence,  God  the  Son  as  the  Eternal  Eeason  operative 
in  creation,  God  the  Spirit  as  an  emanation  from  the  Eternal 
God,  who  spoke  by  the  prophets.  Like  Justin,  he  mentions 
the  angels  as  holding  a  place  in  Christian  theology.  His 
philosophical  position  is  eclectic,  with  a  decided  leaning  to 
Plato,  but  tinged  with  ideas  from  many  sources.  He  has 
been  suspected  of  belonging  to  the  Montanists,  from  his 
account  of  the  passive  attitude  of  a  prophet  under  the  action 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  from  his  absolute  prohibition  of  second 
marriages ;  but  it  would  not  be  difficult  to  find  similar  views 
in  orthodox  writers  such  as  Justin  and  Hernias.  It  is  unlikely 
that  a  writer  so  cultured  and  temperate  would  have  sym- 
pathised with  the  ill-balanced  enthusiasm  of  Montanus. 

As  to  the  "  Defence  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Eesurrection," 
this  was  a  peculiarly  difficult  subject  for  a  Greek  philosopher, 
and  probably  no  dogma  proved  so  great  a  stumbling-block  to 
thoughtful  Gentiles.  There  lay  at  the  root  of  all  heathen 
speculation  the  axiom  that  matter  is  per  se  imperfection ;  and 
the  union  of  form  with  matter  in  an  individual  and  eternal 
relationship  seemed  not  merely  inconceivable  but  contra- 
dictory to  the  highest  idea  of  God.  Athenagoras  has  ap- 
proached his  theme  in  a  reverent  and  not  over-combative 
spirit,  and  confines  his  reasoning  to  those  broad  principles  of 
God's  Nature  and  man's  final  cause  which  will  never  lose 
their  point. 

Almost  all  historians  put  a  high  value  upon  his  work. 

1  Trpea^eia.  It  seems,  however,  that  in  later  Greek  this  word  is  used  in 
a  more  extended  sense. 


30O  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

"  He  writes,"  says  Donaldson,  "  as  a  man  who  is  determined 
that  the  real  state  of  the  case  shall  be  exactly  known." 
And  the  steadfastness  with  which  he  keeps  this  object  before 
him  is  worthy  of  all  praise.  But  he  was  not  the  first  and 
will  not  be  the  last  to  experience  the  difficulty  of  making 
the  truth  appear  when  those  to  whom  it  is  addressed  are 
determined  not  to  recognise  it. 

In  connection  with  Athenagoras,  though  far  removed  from 
his  spirit,  we  may  notice  a  short  satirical  work  on  heathen 
philosophy  by  one  Hermias,  which  is  found  in  the  older 
editions  of  the  Fathers  annexed  to  his  writings.  Nothing 
whatever  is  known  of  the  author.  His  date  is  disputed,  but 
the  general  tone  savours  of  the  time  of  Lucian  and  Plutarch. 
The  work  is  entitled,  A  Ridicule  of  Outside  Fliilosoinliy} 
implying  that  Christianity  is  the  true  philosophy,  a  theory 
which  was  most  earnestly  put  forward  in  the  second  and 
early  part  of  the  third  century.  It  contains  a  large  assort- 
ment of  absurd  and  contradictory  opinions  on  God,  the  soul, 
and  the  world,  placed  side  by  side,  to  show  their  mutual 
repugnance,  but  neither  criticism  properly  so  called,  nor 
constructive  doctrine.  Its  only  value  arises  from  its  anti- 
quity. We  may  probably  assign  it  to  the  time  of  M. 
Aurelius. 

We  come  now  to  one  of  the  choicest  gems  of  early  Christian 
thought,  the  anonymous  Letter  to  Diognetus,  formerly 
ascribed  to  Justin.  This  little  treatise  was  first  published 
in  1592  by  Henricus  Stephanus,  from  a  medigeval  transcrip- 
tion of  a  very  ancient  and  defective  manuscript,  which 
contained  the  following  works  : — ( i )  Two  pieces,  each  by  the 
"  holy  Justin,"  "  On  the  Divine  Monarchy','  and  "  An  Admoni- 
tion to  the  Greeks;"  (2)  an  exposition,  said  also  to  be  by 
^u^tiw/'  Concerning  the  Trinity;"  (3)  two  discourses  by  a 
person  designated  as  "  the  same,"  but  not  otherwise  specified, 

^  Aia(Tvp(jt.bs  tQv  I|w  (jiiXoabcpwv.  The  Sophists  of  this  period  wrote  short 
essays  of  a  satirical  character  called  (TKib\peis.  Sometimes  they  published 
ironical  panegyrics  of  trifling  or  unworthy  subjects,  of  which  the  Laudes 
fumi  et  pulveris  is  an  example.  The  work  of  Hermias  belongs  to  the 
former  class. 


LETTER  TO   DIOGNETUS.  301 

"  To  Greeks "  and  "  To  Diognetus ; "  (4)  the  treatises  of 
Athenagoras  "  On  Belial f  of  Christians  "  and  "  On  the  Bestir - 
rection." 

The  work  on  the  Trinity  is  now  generally  believed  not  to 
be  Justin's.  But  even  if  it  were  his,  it  would  not  follow 
that  the  copyist  of  the  other  two  treatises,  in  prefixing 
"  By  the  same "  as  a  mark  of  authorship,  meant  thereby  to 
ascribe  them  to  Justin.  As  Professor  Birks  remarks,  they 
may  have  been  taken  from  a  torn  copy  with  a  piece  missing 
at  the  beginning,  and  this  missing  piece  may  have  contained 
the  first  of  the  series  of  writings,  together  with  the  name  of 
the  writer.  And  this  is  what  he  thinks  actually  occurred. 
He  therefore  groups  together  the  Address  to  Greeks  and 
the  Letter  to  Diognetus  as  Nos.  2  and  3  respectively  of 
an  apologetic  series,  of  which  No.  i  is  lost.  He  supposes 
the  author  to  have  taken  some  public  step  which  in  the 
eyes  of  his  equals  compromised  him  as  a  Christian ;  that  the 
first  treatise  gave  an  account  of  his  motives  in  renouncing 
heathenism,  the  second  depicted  the  falsehood  of  the  Pagan 
creed,  the  third  explained  the  nature  of  Christianity,  and 
that,  in  spite  of  their  different  titles,  they  were  virtually  all 
addressed  to  Diognetus.  If  we  ask  whether  any  light  can 
be  thrown  upon  their  authorship,  he  mentions  that  Cureton, 
in  his  Spieilegium  Syriaeum,  publishes  a  version  of  what 
appears  to  be  another  set  of  notes  to  the  same  discourse 
To  Greeks,  which  is  there  ascribed  to  Ambrosius,  a  chief 
man  of  Greece,  who  became  a  Christian,  and  justified  his 
conduct  to  his  fellow-magnates  in  the  reply  commented  upon, 
which  is  found  to  be  the  same  with  the  existing  discourse. 
Pursuing  this  clue,  he  points  out  that  there  is  some  ground 
for  believing  that  an  Ambrosius  of  noble  lineage  at  Athens, 
during  the  time  of  Marcus  Aurelius,  may  have  been  the 
founder  of  the  Ambrosian  family  of  the  gens  Aurelia,  of 
whom  one  member  was  the  correspondent  of  Origen.  And 
as  the  only  Diognetus  known  to  us  in  times  after  Christ  is 
the  painter-philosopher  who  acted  as  tutor  to  the  boyhood 
of  Marcus  Aurelius,  it  is  tempting  to  connect  the  two  names 
together,  and  to  imagine  Ambrosius,  the  Athenian  noble,  to 


302 


THE  APOLOGISTS. 


have  pleaded  with  Diognetus,  the  courtier-philosopher,  the 
cause  of  the  faith  he  had  adopted. 

It  may  be  objected  by  a  critical  reader  that  this  assign- 
ment of  authorship  is  inconclusive  and  uncertain.  This  is 
admitted;  but  we  are  nevertheless  of  opinion  that  it  is 
desirable  to  give,  whenever  possible,  a  human  interest  to 
every  writing  of  antiquity  by  connecting  it  with  some  writer's 
name.  How  much  more  satisfaction  we  derive  from  a  trea- 
tise when  we  can  form  some  idea  of  its  author  1  How  much 
more  stimulated  we  are  to  grapple  with  its  difficulties! 
Unfortunately,  this  cannot  always  be  done  ;  but  even  where 
the  author  is  unknown,  plausible  conjectures  as  to  who  he 
was  may  greatly  help  towards  a  sympathetic  study  of  his 
work.  Who  can  deny  that  we  lose  immensely  by  conceiving 
of  the  deutero-Isaiah  as  merely  the  "  Great  Unknown "  ? 
Criticism  may  compel  acquiescence,  but  the  loss  remains. 
What  would  we  not  give  to  know  who  wrote  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  ?  And  yet  surely  it  is  better  to  study  it  with 
some  hypothesis  of  authorship,  if  we  desire  to  penetrate  to 
its  inner  spirit.  In  proportion  to  the  grandeur  of  a  writing, 
so  is  the  pleasure  of  knowing  its  author.  It  is  the  high 
value  of  the  Address  to  Greeks  and  Epistle  to  Diognetus 
that  makes  us  favourably  inclined  to  adopt  Birks'  theory  of 
their  authorship,  hanging  though  it  does  upon  a  more  than 
slender  thread  of  tradition. 

At  any  rate,  it  assists  our  study  of  the  two  works.  For, 
in  the  first  place,  they  breathe  a  tone  of  calm  dignity  and 
aristocratic  reserve  as  different  as  possible  from  the  plain, 
middle-class  sociability  of  Justin's  mind.  In  the  second 
place,  though  coloured  with  philosophy  to  some  extent,  their 
philosophical  view  is  that  of  the  high-bred  man  of  the  world 
rather  than  of  the  quiet,  unpretending  student.  In  the 
third  place,  their  stately  language  and  pure  Attic  culture 
bespeak  an  intellect  of  far  higher  order  than  was  given  to 
the  martyred  saint  of  Flavia  Neapolis.  Everything  in  both 
works,  and  especially  in  the  so-called  Epistle,  points  to  a 
writer  whose  rank  and  opportunities  agree  exactly  with 
those  ascribed  to  the  Athenian  Ambrosius. 


LETTER  TO   DIOGNETUS.  303 

It  has  not  been  usual  to  consider  the  two  works  together,  nor 
do  we  believe  that  Professor  Birks'  hypothesis  has  met  with 
any  general  support.  And  as  the  Letter  to  Diognetus  is  far 
the  better  known  of  the  two,  and  for  some  time  was  accorded 
a  place,  which  is  still  claimed  for  it  by  some,  among  the 
works  of  the  sub-apostolic  age,  it  will  be  convenient  to  con- 
fine our  criticisms  to  it,  only  observing  that,  if  it  be  read  in 
connection  with  the  Eeply  to  the  Greeks,  the  real  resemblance 
between  the  two  treatises  will  be  at  once  apparent. 

In  our  opinion,  the  hypothesis  of  its  anteriority  to  Justin 
is  inadmissible.  The  use  of  the  word  olKovojJuia  with  refer- 
ence to  the  inner  relation  between  the  First  and  Second 
Persons  of  the  Holy  Trinity  points  to  a  later  date.  If  one 
must  fix  a  time  for  its  composition,  one  would  incline  to 
place  it  in  the  time  of  Aurelius,  between  Justin  and  Athena- 
goras,  and  to  regard  it  as  emanating  either  from  Athens  or 
Eome,  the  former  by  preference,  in  accordance  with  the 
tradition  already  mentioned. 

Unfortunately,  the  single  MS.  in  which  it  was  preserved 
(which  perished  in  the  conflagration  at  Strasburg  in  1870) 
was  in  two  places  defective.  The  work  as  we  have  it 
consists  of  twelve  short  chapters.  The  first  break  is  in 
chap,  vii.,  where  the  critics  are  of  opinion  that  the  inser- 
tion of  a  few  words  is  sufficient  to  bridge  it  over.  The  second 
is  after  chap,  x.,  when  the  sequel  takes  the  form  of  a  per- 
oration, and  is  so  completely  different  from  what  goes  before, 
both  in  matter  and  manner,  that  many  critics  believe  it  to 
belong  to  a  different  work.  These  two  concluding  chapters 
are  so  obviously  the  end  of  a  sermon  or  address  to  cate- 
chumens, that  if  we  accept  them  as  genuine,  we  are  com- 
pelled to  regard  the  whole  work  as  a  homiletic  discourse  and 
incorrectly  described  as  an  epistle  at  all.  The  arguments 
on  neither  side  are  convincing.  But,  on  the  whole,  we  incline 
to  think  that  the  peculiar  loftiness  of  style  points  to  one 
and  the  same  author,  and  that  the  difficulties  of  separating 
the  two  chapters  are  greater  than  those  of  retaining  them. 

In  these  the  author  describes  himself  as  a  disciple  of 
Apostles  and  a  teacher  of  Gentiles.     These  epithets,  however. 


304  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

must  be  understood  rhetorically  and  not  historically ;  as 
indicating  the  spirit  of  his  research,  not  the  actual  persons 
from  whom  he  drew  it.  His  spiritual  affinity  with  the 
writer  to  the  Hebrews  is  manifest,  and  his  indebtedness  to 
the  theology  of  S.  John  is  also  traceable,  and  in  that  sense 
he  may  without  presumption  call  himself  their  disciple. 

In  the  Letter  he  sets  himself  to  answer  three  questions 
propounded  by  Diognetus — (i.)  "  On  what  God  relying  and 
how  worshipping,  Christians  all  look  above  the  universe  itself 
and  despise  death,  and  neither  reckon  those  gods  who  are  so 
accounted  by  the  Greeks  nor  observe  any  superstition  of  the 
Jews."  The  first  part  of  this  question  is  treated  very  briefly, 
probably  because  of  its  much  fuller  discussion  in  the  treatise 
to  Greeks,  but  the  section  devoted  to  Judaism  is  longer,  and 
contains  some  very  striking  and  brilliant  remarks. 

(2.)  The  second  question  is,  "  What  is  this  kindly  affection 
that  Christians  have  for  one  another  ? "  To  this  he  replies  in 
the  section  chaps,  v.-ix.,  pointing  out  the  supernatural  char- 
acter of  the  Christians'  mutual  love,  the  mysterious  nature  of 
their  polity,  and  the  regenerating  power  of  their  leading  doc- 
trines. The  most  important  chapters  for  theology  are  the 
seventh,  eia;hth  and  ninth,  in  which  he  describes  the  eternal 
love  of  God  the  Father,  as  shown  in  His  sending  His  Eoyal 
Servant  {iraU),  whom  He  also  calls  His  own  Son  (^Ihiov  vlov), 
and  affirms  to  be  truly  God  and  man,  the  Creator  and  Euler  of 
the  universe,  to  redeem  mankind.  He  speaks  of  God  in  philo- 
sophical language  as  not  only  Almighty,  Invisible,  Good,  and 
True,  but  also  as  Wrathless  (aopyijTo^)  and  Unconstraining, 
"  for  force,"  he  says,  as  Irenseus  after  him,  "  belongeth  not  to 
God."  The  theology  of  this  section  has  by  some  been  thought 
to  savour  of  Sabellianism,  but  incorrectly,  or  of  Marcionism, 
but  with  still  less  ground.  The  platform  on  which  it  stands 
is  genuinely  Catholic,  but,  as  in  the  case  of  Justin,  the  theo- 
logy is  not  fully  developed  either  in  its  view  of  the  Person 
of  Christ  or  in  its  apprehension  of  the  co-equal  Godhead  of 
the  Holy  Spirit. 

(3.)  The  third  question  of  Diognetus  is  thus  stated  by  the 
writer,  "  What,  in  fine,  is  this  new  race  or  practice  that  has 


LETTER  TO  DIOGNETUS.  305 

invaded  society  now  and  never  before  ? "  The  answer  to  this 
seems  to  begin  with  chap.  x.  It  is  then  interrupted  by  a 
lacuna  of  unknown  length,  and  perhaps  concluded  with  the 
oratorical  rhapsody  of  the  last  two  chapters.  It  probably 
included  a  discussion  on  the  "  fulness  of  time,"  giving 
reasons  why  the  advent  of  Christ  was  delayed  so  long,  and 
carefully  establishing  the  continuity  of  His  Eevelation  with 
that  of  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  it  com- 
pleted, and  by  completing  closed. 

The  writer  never  mentions  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
though  it  is  quite  possible  he  may  have  done  so  in  the  portion 
that  is  lost,  as  it  commences  with  a  beautiful  picture  of  the 
fruits  of  faith,  emphasising  the  glorious  privilege  which 
Christians  have  of  reproducing  the  Divine  life  in  their  own. 
The  whole  work  is  so  exquisitely  graceful  and  so  concisely 
arranged  that,  even  in  its  mutilated  state,  it  conveys  the 
impression  (rare  among  patristic  writings)  of  high  literary 
power.  The  reader  will  be  glad  to  have  some  extracts  from 
it  as  justifying  this  praise.  We  have  therefore  selected  two, 
one  describing  the  life  of  Christians  on  earth,  the  other 
embodying  an  impassioned  summary  of  doctrine  in  the  last 
two  chapters,  the  great  difficulty  of  which  taxes  the  trans- 
lator's powers  to  the  utmost,  and,  we  fear,  prevents  him 
doing  more  than  very  imperfect  justice  to  its  beauty.  It 
will  be  seen  how  saturated  the  writer  is  with  the  teaching 
both  of  S.  Paul  and  S.  John. 

The  Life  op  Christians  (Chaps,  v.  and  vi.). 

*'  The  Christians  are  not  distinguished  from  the  rest  of  man- 
kind either  by  nationality  or  language.  They  have  no  separate 
cities,  they  use  no  special  dialect,  they  practise  no  peculiar  mode 
of  life.  They  inhabit  the  cities  of  Greece  and  the  rest  of  the 
world  just  as  each  finds  his  place  allotted  to  him.  They  follow 
the  local  customs  in  respect  to  meat  and  drink,  costume,  and 
other  social  habits,  and  yet  they  carry  about  with  them  the 
strange  and  avowedly  mysterious  signs  of  their  true  nationality. 
They  dwell  in  their  own  country,  but  as  strangers ;  they  share  in 
the  privileges  of  its  citizenship,  but  endure  all  the  disabilities 

U 


3o6  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

of  aliens.  Every  foreign  country  is  to  them  a  native  land,  and 
every  native  land  is  to  them  a  foreign  country.  They  marry 
and  bring  up  families  like  other  folk,  but  they  do  not,  like  others, 
expose  their  infant  children.  They  provide  their  meals  in 
common,  but  theirs  is  no  common  meal.^  They  live  in  the  flesh, 
but  not  after  the  flesh.  They  sojourn  upon  earth,  but  their  citi- 
zenship is  in  heaven.  They  obey  the  established  laws,  and  yet  by 
their  individual  lives  they  surpass  the  laws.  They  love  all  men, 
and  yet  they  are  persecuted  by  all.  They  are  not  understood, 
and  yet  they  are  condemned.  They  are  put  to  death,  and  yet 
are  raised  to  life.  They  are  poor,  and  yet  make  many  rich. 
They  are  in  want  of  everything,  and  yet  in  everything  they 
abound.  They  are  dishonoured,  and  yet  by  their  dishonour  are 
covered  with  glory.  They  are  defamed,  and  yet  are  counted 
righteous.  They  are  reviled,  and  bless.  They  are  insulted,  and 
entreat  men  honourably.  They  do  good,  and  are  punished  as 
evil-doers,  and  when  punished  they  rejoice  as  being  raised  to 
life.  The  Jews  make  war  on  them  as  Gentiles,  and  the  Greeks 
persecute  them,  and  yet  those  that  hate  them  cannot  state  the 
cause  of  their  dislike. 

"  In  one  word,  Christians  are  to  the  world  what  the  soul  is 
to  the  body.  The  soul  is  dispersed  through  all  the  limbs  of  the 
body  :  so  the  Christians  are  dispersed  through  all  the  cities  of 
the  world.  The  soul  dwells  within  the  body,  yet  it  is  not  part 
thereof :  so  Christians  dwell  in  the  world,  and  yet  they  are  no 
part  of  it.  The  soul  is  invisible,  yet  is  guarded  within  a  visible 
body  :  so  the  Christians  are  visibly  in  the  world,  yet  their  worship 
is  a  thing  invisible.^  The  flesh  hates  the  soul  and  makes  war 
upon  it,  though  the  soul  injures  it  not,  but  only  hinders  it  from 
indulging  its  lusts  :  so  the  world  hates  the  Christians,  though  they 
injure  it  not,  but  only  set  themselves  against  its  pleasures.  The 
soul  loves  the  flesh  that  hates  it :  so  do  Christians  love  those  that 
hate  them.  The  soul  is  enclosed  within  the  body,  while  yet  it  is  the 
soul  that  holds  the  body  together  :  so  the  Christians  are  enclosed 
within  the  prison  of  the  world,  and  yet  it  is  they  who  hold  the 
world  together.     The  soul  is  immortal,  and  vet  dwells  in  a  mortal 

1  A  play  on  the  two  senses  of  koivos,  common,  viz.,  shared  alike  by  all, 
and  unclean  or  polluted,  alluding  to  the  abominable  calumnies  circulated 
about  the  Christian  love-feasts. 

-  Alluding  either  to  the  secrecy  of  Christian  worship,  or  perhaps  to  its 
spiritual  and  inward  character. 


LETTER  TO   DIOGNETUS.  307 

tabernacle  :  so,  too,  Christians  sojourn  among  things  corruptible, 
waiting  for  the  incorruption  of  Heaven.  The  soul  is  made  better 
by  being  stinted  in  the  matter  of  meat  and  drink  :  so  Christians 
increase  more  and  more  by  being  daily  punished.  God  has 
assigned  them  a  certain  place  to  fill,  and  it  is  not  lawful  for  them 
to  refuse  to  fill  it." 


A  SuMMiXG  UP  OF  THE  DocTRiXE  (Cliaps.  xi.  and  xii.). 

"  I  offer  no  strange  exhortation,  I  submit  no  unreasonable  re- 
quest. But  having  become  a  disciple  of  the  Apostles,  I  would 
fain  become  a  teacher  of  the  Gentiles,  worthily  ministering  to  the 
disciples  of  truth  that  which  has  been  delivered  to  me.  For  who 
that  has  been  rightly  instructed  and  become  a  friend  of  the  Word 
does  not  seek  to  learn  clearly  the  things  that  have  been  openly 
shown  to  the  disciples  through  the  Word  ?  To  whom  the  Word 
appearing  made  them  manifest,  speaking  with  plainness,  not 
understood  by  unbelievers,  but  declared  by  disciples,  who  being 
reckoned  faithful  learned  from  Him  the  mysteries  of  the  Father. 
For  this  cause  He  sent  forth  the  Word  that  He  might  appear  to 
the  world.  Who,  being  dishonoured  by  His  people  and  preached 
by  Apostles,  was  believed  in  by  Gentiles.  This  is  He  that  was 
from  the  beginning,  that  appeared  new  but  was  found  to  be  old, 
and  ever  newly  is  begotten  in  the  hearts  of  saints.  This  is  the 
Everlasting  One,  ever  reckoned  a  Son  to-day,  by  Whom  the 
Church  is  enriched,  by  whom  grace  being  simplified  is  fulfilled  in 
the  saints,  who  granteth  insight,  explaineth  mysteries,  announceth 
times,  rejoiceth  in  the  faithful,  giveth  gifts  to  seekers  who  break 
not  the  pledge  of  faith  nor  transgress  the  ordinances  of  the 
Fathers.  Then  the  fear  of  the  Law  is  chanted,  the  grace  of  the 
prophets  is  understood,  the  faith  of  the  Gospels  stablished,  and 
the  tradition  of  the  Apostles  preserved,  and  the  grace  of  the 
Church  exulteth.  For  which  reason  thou  shalt  know  without 
sorrow  what  the  Word  exhorteth,  by  whom  He  wills  and  when 
He  wills.  For  whatever  purposes  of  the  Word  we  at  His  bid- 
ding have  been  moved  to  utter  with  pain,  of  these  we  make  you 
partakers  out  of  love  in  all  things  revealed. 

"  By  earnest  reading  and  hearing  of  these  ye  shall  know  aright 
how  great  things  God  grants  to  those  that  love  Him,  who  become 
a  very  paradise  of  joy,  an  all-fruitful  flourishing  tree,  springing 
up  within  themselves,  adorned  with  varied  fruits.     For  in  this 


3o8  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

place  are  planted  the  tree  of  knowledge  and  the  tree  of  life :  but 
it  is  not  the  fact  of  knowledge  that  destroys,  but  disobedience. 
For  that  which  is  written  is  nob  without  meaning,  how  God 
from  the  beginning  planted  a  tree  of  knowledge  and  a  tree  of 
life  in  the  midst  of  Paradise,  indicating  that  life  was  through 
knowledge.  But  our  first  parents  by  using  it  corruptly  were 
tormented  by  the  serpent's  guile.  For  neither  life  without 
knowledge,  nor  knowledge  without  true  life,  is  safe  :  wherefore  the 
two  were  planted  side  by  side.  And  this  meaning  the  Apostle 
discerned,  when  blaming  knowledge  pursued  apart  from  the 
bidding  of  truth  unto  life,  he  said,  '  Knowledge  puffeth  up,  but 
charity  edifieth.'  For  he  that  thinketh  he  knoweth  anything 
without  the  true  knowledge  that  is  certified  by  life,  knoweth  it 
not,  but  is  deceived  by  the  serpent,  not  having  loved  life.  But 
he  that  knows  with  fear  and  seeks  life,  plants  with  hope,  expect- 
ing fruit.  Let  thy  heart  be  knowledge,  let  the  true  Word  enter- 
tained by  thee  be  (thy)  life.  Whose  tree  if  thou  bearest  and 
whose  fruit  if  thou  choosest,  thou  shalt  ever  gather  the  things 
that  with  God  are  desired,  which  the  serpent  toucheth  not  neither 
doth  error  approach  to,  nor  is  Eve  corrupted,  but  a  Virgin  is 
trusted  :i  and  Salvation  is  made  clear,  and  the  Apostles  become 
intelligible,  and  the  Lord's  passover  goes  forw^ard,  and  the  wax- 
lights  are  brought  together,  and  supramundane  things  are  set  in 
order,  and  in  teaching  the  Saints  the  Word  is  made  glad,  through 
Whom  the  Father  is  glorified,  to  Whom  be  glory  world  without 
end.     Amen." 

In  this  condensed  and  pregnant  passage  we  see  the  lines 
of  a  complete  course  of  doctrine  sketched  out,  though  in 
terms  designedly  veiled  and  mysterious,  culminating  in  that 
perfect  communion  with  Christ  the  Enlightener,  which  is 
attained  through  His  presence  in  the  Eucharistic  worship, 
the  appointed  orderly  channel  of  heavenly  grace  and  teach- 
ing of  celestial  mysteries. 

Some  have  endeavoured  to  fasten  upon  the  writer  a  ten- 
dency towards  Gnostic  error,  but  we  should  rather  regard 

^  Or  perhaps  "  is  made  faithful."  The  key  to  this  difficult  sentence  lies 
in  the  conception  of  the  Church  of  God  as  the  spiritual  Paradise,  and  also 
as  the  antitype  of  Eve,  the  virgin  bride  of  the  Second  Adam.  There  is  na 
doubt  a  further  reference  to  the  Virgin  Mother  of  Christ. 


DIONYSIUS.  309 

his  language  as  pointing  to  the  high  ideal  of  spiritual  know- 
ledge given  by  S.  John,  and  at  a  later  date  wrought  out  into 
a  finished  system  by  the  great  Alexandrian  teachers.  While 
highly  guarded  and  metaphorical,  his  language  unquestion- 
ably implies  that  the  true  gnosis  is  inseparable  from  a  pure 
heart  and  a  holy  life;  and  as  such  the  Catholic  Christian 
can  find  no  fault  with  it.  The  view  of  the  Holy  Eucharist 
here  shadowed  forth  is  exalted  and  ennobling,  and  though 
perhaps  our  taste  is  a  little  offended  by  the  introduction  of 
a  material  symbol,  yet  when  we  consider  the  use  of  wax- 
tapers  in  the  dark  chambers  to  which  Christians  were  driven 
for  worship  as  necessary  for  purposes  of  light,  we  shall  hardly 
find  fault  with  their  introduction  into  a  passage  otherwise 
supremely  spiritual  and  expressed  in  language  chaster  and 
more  exalted  than  we  shall  easily  find  in  any  other  of  the 
Ante-Mcene  writers.  The  reader  who  would  enter  fully  into 
the  author's  mind  should  compare  the  Epistle  with  the 
Apologies  of  Justin  and  Athenagoras,  and  also  with  the 
striking  fragment  already  given  from  Melito. 

Another  interesting  figure  in  the  Church  of  Greece  is 
Dionysius,  Bishop  of  Corinth  (fl.  a.d.  170),  of  whom  the 
following  account  is  supplied  by  Eusebius.^  He  succeeded 
Primus  in  the  bishopric,  and  exercised  spiritual  supervision, 
not  only  within  his  own  diocese,  but  far  beyond  its  limits, 
and  did  excellent  service  to  Christ's  cause  by  writing  Catholic 
epistles.  One  of  these,  addressed  to  the  Lacedaemonians,  con- 
tained a  catechetical  scheme  of  doctrine,  as  well  as  powerful 
arguments  for  peace  and  unity.  Another,  addressed  to  the 
Athenians,  exhorted  to  faith  and  heavenly  conversation, 
from  which  he  reproached  them  with  having  fallen  away, 
since  the  martyrdom  of  their  bishop  Publius.  A  third, 
inscribed  to  the  inhabitants  of  Mcomedia,  controverted  the 
doctrine  of  Marcion.  A  fourth,  to  the  Gortynians,  entered 
into  the  question  of  a  disputed  episcopal  succession,  begging 
them  to  accept  the  orthodox  bishop  and  to  avoid  heretical 
perversions.  A  fifth,  addressed  to  Amastris  and  the  Pontic 
churches,  whose  bishops  had  requested  him  to   intervene, 

'  Eus.  H.  E.  iv.  23. 


310  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

contained  important  exegetical  matter,  coupled  with  a  re- 
quest to  ■  receive  Palmas.  Eecommendations  were  added 
concerning  marriage  and  celibacy,  and  the  desirability  of  re- 
admitting to  communion  on  repentance  every  kind  of  sinner, 
including  the  schismatic  and  heretic.  It  will  be  seen  how 
varied  and  influential  was  the  activity  of  Dionysius,  and  how 
wide  an  authority  he  enjoyed. 

But  his  recommendations  did  not  always  pass  unchal- 
lenged. In  his  Epistle  to  the  Gnossian  Church,  he  exhorted 
Pinytus,  the  bishop,  not  to  lay  by  his  strict  views  on 
continence  too  heavy  a  yoke  upon  his  flock,  but  to  re- 
member the  infirmity  of  human  nature.  Pinytus  replied 
with  some  spirit,  that  greatly  as  he  reverenced  Dionysius, 
he  thought  he  might  feed  his  people  with  stronger  meat. 
As  for  his  own  flock,  they  had  learned  the  wisdom  of  the 
full-grown,  and  did  not  mean  to  slide  lazily  into  an  infantile 
old  age  from  imbibing  doctrines  that  were  but  milk  for 
babes.  The  liberal  views  of  discipline  held  by  Dionysius  do 
not  imply  any  personal  laxity,  but  they  spring  from  his 
organising  statesmanlike  temper,  which  discerned  the  impos- 
sibility of  enforcing  ascetic  ideals  in  a  church  which  was 
to  include  all  classes  and  all  types  of  manhood.  The  same 
thing  meets  us  again  in  the  controversy  between  TertuUian 
and  the  orthodox,  between  Cyprian  and  Stephen.  Where 
comprehension  is  the  object,  rules  must  not  be  too  rigid ;  at 
any  rate,  the  way  of  penitence  must  be  made  open  to  all. 
Pinytus,  however,  must  have  urged  his  views  with  mode- 
ration, acuteness,  and  scriptural  authority,  for  Eusebius 
commends  him  highly  both  for  his  sound  theology  and  for 
his  faithful  pastoral  solicitude. 

The  last  and  most  interesting  letter  of  Dionysius  that 
Eusebius  mentions  is  that  to  the  Eoman  Church,  of  which 
Soter  was  then  bishop.  It  contains  a  remarkable  testimony 
to  the  generous  spirit  of  catholic  sympathy  in  which  the 
revenues  of  that  Church  were  administered  : — 

"  It  has  from  the  beginning  "  (he  says)  "  been  your  custom  in 
many  ways  to  assist  all  Christians,  and  especially  to  send  money 


DIONYSIUS.  311 

to  the  various  city  churches,  thus  mitigating  their  home  poverty, 
and  more  especially  enabling  them  to  send  succour  to  their  mem- 
bers who  are  labouring  in  the  mines.  And  this  custom,  handed 
down  from  the  first,  you  have  adhered  to  with  true  Roman 
steadfastness.  And  your  blessed  ^  bishop  Soter  has  even  expanded 
its  application  by  sending  round  the  gifts  of  your  munificence  to 
the  saints,  and  advising  all  those  who  come  to  Rome  and  seek 
his  counsel  with  the  patient  care  of  a  true  father  in  God." 

Dionysius  complained  bitterly  of  the  way  in  which  his 
letters  were  tampered  with.  "  I  write "  (he  says)  "  not  to 
please  myself,  but  because  continually  pressed  by  Chris- 
tian friends  to  do  so.  And  the  Apostles  of  the  Devil  sow 
tares  in  my  field ;  they  pick  out  many  true  things  and  put 
in  many  false.  It  is  no  wonder  men  have  striven  to  falsify 
the  Scriptures  of  the  Lord,  if  they  spare  not  writings  so 
inferior  as  mine."  One  of  his  letters  was  addressed  to  an 
individual  named  Chrysophora,  and  was  full  of  wise  counsel. 

From  these  notices  we  may,  as  Salmon  remarks,  gather 
several  facts  of  interest.  First,  we  see  the  solidarity  of 
Christendom.  The  bishop  of  a  provincial  church,  apostolic 
in  origin,  but  not  otherwise  pre-eminent,  is  in  constant 
correspondence  on  matters  of  general  business  with  the 
representatives  of  churches  in  many  parts  of  the  world. 
Then  we  observe  the  general  prevalence  of  the  Episcopal 
form  of  government.  Though  the  bishop  has  not  yet  come 
to  take  the  place  of  his  church,  yet  he  is  at  the  head  of  it 
and  represents  it,  though  letters  are  still  inscribed  to  the 
church  and  not  to  the  bishop.  Thirdly,  we  remark  the  value 
attached  by  Christians  to  their  literature.  Dionysius  tells 
Soter  that  the  Corinthian  Church  had  read  the  letter  of  the 
Roman  Church  in  their  Lord's  day  service,  and  would  con- 
tinue to  do  so  from  time  to  time.  He  incidentally  mentions 
also  the  use  of  Clement's  Epistle  in  Divine  worship.  He 
alludes  to  the  Gnostic  interpolations  and  excisions  of  the 
Sacred  Books  in  the  interests   of   their   heresies,  and   he 

1  fiaKapios,  an  epithet  generally  applied  to  departed  saints,  here  indi- 
cating an  extraordinary  degree  of  living  panctity. 


312  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

implies  that  those  attempts  had  been  frustrated  by  the  vigi- 
lance of  Christian  believers.  The  exegetical  research  which 
Eusebius  attributes  to  him  need  not  be  confined  to  the 
Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament,  but  was  more  probably 
directed  towards  some  of  those  of  the  ISTew.  Salmon  is  of 
opinion  that  the  few  fragments  we  possess  show  traces  of 
an  acquaintance  with  the  Gospel  of  S.  Matthew,  the  Acts, 
the  First  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  and  the  Apocalypse. 

Contemporary  with  Dionysius  were  other  able  writers  now 
lost,  whose  names  are  preserved  by  Eusebius.  Philippus  was 
bishop  of  Gortyna  in  Crete,  and  wrote  against  the  heresy 
of  Marcion.  Modestus,  whose  see  is  not  mentioned,  was, 
according  to  the  historian,  even  more  successful  in  exposing 
his  fundamental  fallacy.  Musanus  or  Musianus,  who  lived 
in  the  reign  of  Antoninus  Pius,  or,  according  to  the  chronicle, 
in  that  of  Severus  (if  he  is  the  same  person),  wrote  in  opposi- 
tion to  Encratism. 

In  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  PraeparcUio  Evangelica,  Euse- 
bius gives  a  long  quotation  from  a  treatise  On  flatter  {ire pi 
iJXt;?)  in  the  form  of  a  dialogue,  which  he  attributes  to  a 
certain  Maximus,  who  flourished  near  the  close  of  the  second 
century.  Some  have  considered  him  to  be  identical  with  a 
bishop  of  Jerusalem  of  the  same  name  in  the  reign  of  Com- 
modus.  As  Eusebius,  however,  was  evidently  ignorant  of 
this  identity,  it  is  safer  to  assume  that  they  were  distinct, 
especially  as  the  name  was  a  very  common  one.  The  same 
fragment  is  incorporated  in  a  work  by  Methodius  on  Free-will, 
borrowed,  as  is  so  often  the  case,  without  acknowledgment. 
It  is  also  found  embedded  in  a  treatise  or  dialogue  against  the 
Marcionites  ascribed  to  Origen,  and  also  in  the  Philocalia  of 
the  same  author.  Eouth  has  edited  the  text  of  the  fragment 
with  much  care,  and  its  excellence  is  such  as  to  justify  the 
constant  use  made  of  it  by  subsequent  writers.  At  the  same 
time,  it  affords  an  instance  of  the  unsatisfactoriness  of  the 
metaphysical  method  in  questions  of  theology.  Many  of  the 
Fathers  occupied  themselves  with  purely  metaphysical  topics, 
notably  Methodius,  Tertullian,  and  Origen.  Irenasus  also 
handled  the  same  subject  as  Maximus  in  a  discourse  now 


MAXIMUS.  313 

lost.  The  great  importance  attached  to  metaphysical  dis- 
cussion arose  from  the  prominence  given  to  it  in  many 
heretical  systems,  which  sought  to  combine  the  ideas  of 
revelation  with  those  of  heathen  philosophy.  To  those  who 
have  studied  the  first  beginnings  of  abstract  thought  among 
the  Greeks,  and  carried  on  their  research  through  the  pre- 
Socratic  systems  to  those  of  Plato  and  Aristotle,  these  later 
treatments  of  the  same  insoluble  problems  will  appear 
deficient  in  interest.  No  new  thoughts  are  introduced ;  the 
only  novelty  is  the  combination  of  the  conception  of  God  as 
Creator  with  the  various  antinomies  of  reason,  but  the  result 
is  still  unsatisfactory  to  the  speculative  intelligence  and 
always  must  be.  The  true  position  of  the  Christian  is  ex- 
pressed once  for  all  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  :  "  By  faith 
we  believe  that  the  worlds  were  formed  by  the  Word  of  God, 
so  that  the  things  which  are  seen  were  not  made  of  things 
which  do  appear." 

At  the  same  time,  the  treatise  of  Maximus  is  not  without 
importance  from  the  candid  and  evidently  truth-seeking  way 
in  which  he  states  the  difficulties  he  endeavours  to  meet. 
He  shows  he  is  aware  of  the  charge  so  often  brought  against 
apologists  that  they  start  objections  only  to  demolish  them 
by  a  preconceived  theory.  He  strives  to  state  his  opponents' 
case  with  fairness,  and  does  not  shrink  from  meeting  argu- 
ment by  argument.  But  the  result  of  all  such  controversial 
literature  remains,  that  it  does  not  really  remove  the  diffi- 
culties it  propounds,  but  merely  shows  the  incompetency  of 
existing  solutions.  Such  proljlems  as  the  origin  of  matter 
and  of  evil  are  beyond  the  grasp  of  the  human  mind,  and 
we  must  either  be  content  to  acquiesce  in  the  statements 
of  Scripture,  or  else  with  the  modern  agnostic  confess  our 
necessary  ignorance  of  them. 

We  now  pass  for  a  moment  to  Antioch,  the  capital  of 
Syria,  the  brilliant  meeting-ground  of  Greek  and  Oriental 
culture.  The  celebrity  of  its  church  dates  from  the  earliest 
days  of  Christianity.  Founded  by  S.  Paul,  ruled  by  S.  Peter 
as  its  first  bishop,  and  counting  the  martyred  Ignatius  among 
his  worthy  successors,  it  maintained  for  centuries  the  high 


314  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

traditions  of  its  origin.  It  was  specially  distinguished  for 
scriptural  knowledge  and  exegesis.  The  sixth  bishop  on  its 
roll  was  Theophilus,  who  held  the  see  during  the  reign  of 
M.  Aurelius,  and  died  about  a.d.  i8i.  This  learned  and 
genial  man  was  the  author  of  several  important  works,  one 
only  of  which  has  come  down  to  us,  the  three  books  addressed 
to  Autolycus,  a  heathen  friend,  for  the  purpose  of  con- 
vincing him  of  the  falsehood  of  idolatry  and  the  truth  of 
Christianity. 

It  covers  the  usual  ground  of  such  treatises  in  a  more 
than  usually  systematic  and  readable  way.  Book  I.  treats 
of  the  nature  and  attributes  of  God,  how  He  may  be  known, 
the  difference  between  the  worship  of  a  real  Being  and 
the  cultus  of  mere  symbols,  the  meaning  of  the  term  Chris- 
tian, and  the  importance  of  a  belief  in  the  resurrection. 
Book  II.  is  devoted  to  an  examination  of  the  popular  mytho- 
logy, and  of  the  more  pretentious  but  equally  unconvincing 
theories  of  the  philosophers,  exposing  their  weakness  and 
inconsistency.  On  the  other  hand,  the  writer  dwells  on 
the  dignity  and  reasonableness  of  the  Biblical  account  of 
Creation,  explaining  in  elegant  language  its  main  features, 
accounting;  for  its  accommodations  to  human  intellisience, 
and  justifying  the  Divine  dealings  with  mankind.  He  gives 
a  short  sketch  of  the  early  history  of  the  human  race  as 
recorded  in  Genesis,  and  shows  how  it  is  held  together  by 
the  thread  of  prophetic  revelation,  adding  testimonies  from 
the  Sibylline  oracles,  and  the  unconscious  confirmation  of  its 
doctrines  by  the  best  heathen  poets.  The  third  book  con- 
tinues the  same  subject,  Autolycus  having  expressed  his 
inability  to  accept  the  reasonings  offered  in  the  second ;  it 
then  proceeds  to  expound  more  fully  the  Christian  concep- 
tion of  God  and  His  Law,  especially  its  inculcation  of  re- 
pentance, of  chastity,  and  of  moral  righteousness  ;  it  defends 
the  Christians  from  the  charges  so  ignorantly  and  calum- 
niously  flung  at  them,  and  asserts  in  a  long  chronological 
argument  the  superior  antiquity  of  the  revealed  faith  to  all 
philosophic  systems,  concluding  with  a  short  explanation 
of  the  perversions  of  history  by  heathen  writers. 


THEOPHILUS.  315 

The  impression  produced  by  reading  the  work  is  decidedly 
favourable  to  the  writer.  It  is  evident  that  Theophilus  was 
a  man  of  large  heart  and  genuine  sympathy,  who  strove  with 
all  the  resources  of  learning  but  also  with  a  humble  trust  in 
God,  who  alone  can  turn  men's  hearts,  to  bring  Autolycus  to 
a  better  judgment.  To  his  half-mocking  question,  "  Where 
is  your  God  ?  show  Him  to  us  ;  '  he  replies  :  — 

"  Show  me  thy  man,  and  I  will  show  thee  my  God.  Show  me 
that  the  eyes  of  thy  soul  see,  that  the  ears  of  thy  soul  hear. 
All  have  eyes  to  see  the  sun,  but  the  blind  cannot  see  it.  As  a 
soiled  mirror  is  incapable  of  receiving  an  image,  so  the  impure 
soul  is  incapable  of  receiving  the  image  of  God.  True,  God  has 
created  all  things  for  the  purpose  of  making  Himself  known 
through  His  works,  just  as  the  invisible  soul  is  discerned  by  its 
operations.  All  life  reveals  Him  ;  His  breath  quickens  all ;  with- 
out it,  all  would  sink  into  nothing ;  but  the  darkness  of  the  soul 
itself  is  the  reason  why  it  does  not  perceive  this  revelation."  ^ 

In  the  fourteenth  chapter  of  the  first  book,  Theophilus 
relates  of  himself  that  it  was  through  meeting  with  the 
Jewish  Scriptures  that  he  was  converted.  Tatian  bears  the 
same  witness  in  his  own  case,  and  that  of  Justin  is  sub- 
stantially similar.  Many  other  Fathers  appeal  to  the  Old 
Testament  in  such  a  manner  as  to  suggest  that,  if  it  was  not 
actually  the  instrument  of  their  conversion,  it  was  well  fitted 
to  have  been  so.  This  striking  testimony  to  the  power  of 
Scripture  is  all  the  more  impressive  when  we  remember — • 
(i)  that  these  men  were  highly  educated  thinkers  accus- 
tomed to  the  best  of  literature  ;  (2)  that  defect  of  style  was 
an  unpardonable  fault  according  to  the  judgment  of  their 
day ;  (3)  that,  as  a  rule,  the  sacred  books  of  another  religion, 
however  critically  interesting,  generally  fall  fiat  from  lack 
of  common  spiritual  associations ;  -  and  (4)  that,  to  appreciate 

1  Quoted  by  Neander. 

-  However  intensely  absorbed  a  comparative  student  may  be  in  the 
Rig  Veda,  the  Tripitaka,  or  the  Zend-Avesta,  his  attitude,  even  when 
wholly  sympathetic,  is  yet  unconsciously  critical.  He  is  not  convinced  by 
Brahmanism,  or  Buddhism,  or  Parseeism,  though  he  may  accept  as  divinely 
given  their  element  of  truth. 


3i6  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

the  prophets'  message,  the  whole  mental  attitude  had  to  be 
unlearnt  and  formed  anew.  Mr.  Dale,  in  one  of  his  admir- 
able books,  tells  us  of  a  Japanese  philosopher,  an  earnest 
seeker  after  truth,  who,  on  reading  S.  John's  Gospel  for  the 
first  time,  suddenly  felt  the  thrill  of  a  new  conviction  awaken- 
ing within  him,  and,  bowing  to  the  divine  impulse,  became 
conscious  of  the  spiritual  birth,  and  of  a  mental  repose  and 
joy  never  before  experienced.  What  this  man  felt  Theophilus 
and  Tatian  had  felt  centuries  before ;  and  if  professing  Chris- 
tian half-believers  would  only  approach  their  Scriptures  in 
the  same  frame  of  mind  as  they  did,  we  cannot  doubt  that 
the  same  result  would  follow  now.  The  attitude  of  pure 
receptivity  of  truth,  we  hope,  is  not  rarer  than  it  was ;  but 
it  is  forestalled  and,  as  it  were,  discounted  by  the  pressure  of 
external  authority;  and  that  readiness  to  catch  the  first 
tones  of  a  heavenly  voice,  of  which  then  no  one  was  ashamed, 
seems  to  have  succumbed  to  the  despairing  persuasion  that 
such  a  voice  is  nowhere  to  be  heard.^ 

In  one  respect  Theophilus  contrasts  unfavourably  with 
Justin  Martyr.  His  treatment  of  mythology  is  harsher  and 
more  severe ;  for,  though  he  admits  that  it  contains  testi- 
monies to  the  truth,  he  speaks  of  these  .as  wrung  from  it 
unconsciously,  almost  against  its  will,  much  as  the  evil 
spirits  in  the  Gospels  are  spoken  of  as  confessing  the  Deity 
of  Christ.  Justin's  attitude  is  gentler  and  more  appreciative, 
though  he,  like  all  the  Fathers,  adopts  the  uncritical  theory 
that  Paganism  borrowed  from  revelation,  and  dressed  it  up 
to  suit  the  prejudices  of  its  votaries.  In  his  scriptural 
interpretation  Theophilus  inclines  to  the  mystical  and  alle- 
gorising views  prevalent  in  the  East  generally,  but  destined 
to  be  superseded  at  Antioch  by  a  truer  and  more  reasonable 
exegesis.  His  History,  Catechetical  Treatises,  and  controver- 
sial pamphlets  Against  Hermogenes  and  Against  Marcion  are 
unfortunately  lost.  /i   ^/^     ,     >r  * 

^  /caXet  re  irpbs  aKoOovras  ov5kv 
iv  fieaqi  SvaTraKei  re  dlpq.. — jEschylus. 


^VjrLrtLirurr^v 


>^(?AHVH9n#     ^'^oymmi"^ 


> 


;«' 


,rs 


% 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


NOPHO 


NT 


tM. 


APR 


xi  B 


RECEIVED 

MAR  1 4  1986 

ClfiC.  Om.  URL 


'^i.HOy  Q  21998 


f^NEWALS 


KlOS■^^GEla^ 

ay ! 

■^A83MNn3VN 


.vlOSANGElfj; 


m.  <'}'':: 


.^tllBRARYC 


711  ^'-^    3 


RECD  vmW^  V8L  ;  ,AY  0  5  2003 
JAN  ^41989 


^^OFCALIFO/?^ 


^OFCMIFO/ 
>'6'AHVH^n- 


^^lOSANGEl 


lALiru/f/l^;^ 


'^/sa^AiNH-; 

vlOSANCE 


t' 


^^/9IMVH^n-^S^ 


AWtUMVFRS/^ 


"^AaBAiNn 

^^^l•llBRAf 


w^tLlBRARYQ/:.       _ 


\(S/A 


o 


'^/5il3AINa]WV 


^OFCALIFO/?^ 


3  1158  00982  6685 


^c/Aava<iiii^ 


la'jNV-'iOv'' 


lYQ^ 


=«3 


^\WEUNIVER% 


vj,lOSANCElfj> 


<ril2DNVS01^ 


-< 

^Aa3AiNn-3WV^ 


^^l•LIBRARY6k 


'^<5/OJIlV3ja^ 


0%.        .^OFCALIFO% 


vvlOSANCElfj> 


^^r > 

%a3AINn]WV^ 


^OFCAIIFO/?^ 


^<?Aavaaii# 


RV^ 


.VlOSANCElfj> 


%a3AINn]WV^ 


^>^ILIBRARYQ^         ^tllBRARYQ^- 


r-n         ego 


^TOIIVDJO^^ 


^WE•llNIVER% 


<ril33NVS01^ 


R% 

5*  <b 


^lOSANCElfj;>. 


> 

'^Ail3AINn]WV^ 


^.OFCAL1FO%,        ^OFCAIIF0/?4^ 


^^WE■UNIVER5•/^ 


^^ilJDNVSOl-'^'^ 


Y/9/^^        ^vM-LIBRARY^^/-, 


,\\UUNIVER5'//, 


v>:lOSANCElfj> 


jo-S^      -^^ojiivj-jo"^        <riiJONVsoi^^ 


'^Ai]3AINn-3\\V^ 


^^^^t•llBRARYQ^ 


'^(f/ojnvjjo^' 


3/?^;,        ^.OFCALIFO% 


5    S. 


,^\U■UNIVEI?5■//, 


-VlOSANCElfj-y. 


i-#     "^^^AyvyaiH^^' 


■^aaAiNn-^vw^ 


^OFCALIFO/?^ 


^<?Ayvijan-# 


w//. 


rj^         o^lOSANCElfj> 


^^^l•L!BRARYQ/^        ^^^^l•LIBRARYQ/: 


\\\EUNIVERV/> 


